An appellate court has ruled that Rahm Emanuel is not legally a resident of Chicago, and therefore cannot run for mayor. The decision overturns a previous ruling.
“We conclude that the candidate neither meets the the municipal code’s requirement that he have ‘resided’ in Chicago for the year preceding the election in which he seeks to participate nor falls within any exception to the requirement.”
More at the Chicago News Cooperative.
UPDATE: ”The Supreme Court is absolutely loathe to overturn an appellate court decision,” an Illinois lawyer tells Politico’s Ben Smith. I have heard much the same from others familiar with Illinois judiciary — the state supreme court is expected to be even less-friendly to Rahm than was the appellate.
Here’s the ruling.
UPDATE II: Emanuel will hold a rally at the Chicago BOE tonight at 5pm in support of his right to be on the ballot. Also, subsequent reporting tempers the idea that the Illinois supreme court will be necessarily unfriendly to Rahm’s appeal. Sam Stein, for instance, has an Illinois lawyer telling him “this is a complete mess” and it will be hard to predict how the higher court will react to it.
UPDATE III: At a press conference just now, Rahm Emanuel reacted to the ruling throwing him off the ballot.
“I had answered President Obama’s request to serve as his chief of staff. I still own a home here — look forward to moving into it one day. [I] vote from here. [I] pay property taxes here,” he said.
“I have no doubt that we will in the end prevail in this effort.”
In terms of next steps, Emanuel said his attorneys will ask for a stay on the appellate court order so that his name can be printed on the ballot along with other candidates. It will be a crunch — early voting starts next week.
Emanuel wouldn’t say whether he thinks politics were involved in the decision by the (elected) judges.
"never let a good crisis go to waste" huh, Rahm?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI can't comment on the legal case, but this seems like an unfortunate outcome. We need people to be able to move from Congress to the White House without giving up any claim to their home town residence. Part of having a federal, rather than national, government seated in a neutral district means that members of the government - cabinet and sub cabinet officers - are living and working in the capital city temporarily but maintain ties to their home town.
We let the president vote in his home state even though he lives in D.C., we should extend this principle to certain high officers, otherwise we force talented people to make a choice between becoming part of the D.C. establishment and participating in the politics of their home town.
This ruling means cabinet officers with regional accents will become rarer and rarer - what's the point of sounding like a local boy if you can't go home again?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseEh, you can go home . . . you just can't run for mayor until you've been there for a year.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWow... didn't see this one coming.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWill he give all that money back, or will he establish a PAC?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIt should depend on whether one spends some quality time at "home" or not. Officials in DC, or state capitals, for that matter, would benefit from the perspective gained from occasional contact with the home folks.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseJason - you concern is valid. However, this is an Illinois state law. Most other state's do not have the requirement that Illinois does with regard to residency. Out West where I live, none of the West Coast states have this requirement, so our officials are free to take jobs in DC and then return home to run for office.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseJason - I don't see this as such a big problem. If a community wants to restrict its representation to people who have actually been participating in the community for just a year before the election, that seems like it should have the right. Rahm has surely been up to his eyeballs in business effecting the nation for the past 2+ years, why should he be expected to know the details of Chicago's? If he wants to be mayor of Chicago, let him live there for a year first.
I'm more concerned that we have a professional political class, flitting from office to office, than I am about actual difficulties flitting from local to national stages and back.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseKeeping legal residence would probably only involve not renting out the Chicago house, maintaining voter registration, a driver's license, etc.
Had ol' Rahm known one year ago that Daley was going to retire this year, he probably would have not renewed the lease agreement with his tenant in Chicago, and re-established residency in plenty of time.
As it is, Daley's retirement caught everyone by surprise, including Rahm.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseHey, someone is ruled ineligible to run for the office of a chief executive by a court that ruled on the merits of the case, and didn't summarily declare plaintiffs lacked standing. Too bad that can only be done for the high office of Mayor, and not for such a lowly job as President.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse/sarc
To answer, I believe, Jason's fear..
This Appellate Court decision is a reading of an Illinois state law for the Chicago mayoral residency requirement.
This is not biding to other political offices in other states.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseRAMiller, I think that won't work for the executive branch. It just doesn't look good for a secretary of defense or white house chief of staff to take frequent trips to his hometown just to maintain his ability to run for mayor, when such a campaign is pretty rare. It would not inspire confidence in his subordinates. I would prefer designating a few offices in the executive branch and saying that those officers maintain their residence wherever they were before their appointment, regardless of local laws.
This would encourage more local government officials to spend some time in Washington without losing their hometown careers. Washington could certainly use them.
With things as they are, Washington is a roach motel: Local politicians can check in but they can't check out. That encourages the creation of an ever growing class of Washington insiders.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseJason,
Rahm didn't keep a home there, unlike the types of politicians you're mentioning. Rahm rented his place out and negated his ability to claim he lived there. That is the key difference.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIs it too late to get that old job back?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseChicago political machine meets rule of law ...
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSomewhat appropriate that Mr. Obama's youthful tactic of ballot challenges is now used against Mr. Emmanuel.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAmazing.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThere is some justice left in the world after all.
Rahm has always maintained a reputation as a nasty little opportunist disguised as a corrupt bureaucrat.
I'm not as articulate as a lot of you here. I just think it's funny.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSchadenfreude.......over-dosing......must....get....empathy pills...........getting dizzy.........vision blurring............save yourself.....its too late for me.........noooooooooo.......
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseMayor Carol Moseley Braun...
I feel bad for my friends in Chicago.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse