Chicagoist: Illinois Supreme Court Rejects Burris's Writ

BlueFairlane

Fri, 09 Jan 2009 16:28:07 -0600

I also am not a lawyer, but I can't imagine Pat Quinn having anything close to legal standing to rescind the Burris appointment. As has been noted many times, the appointment was completely legal under Illinois and federal law. Blagojevich's successor can't just go back and undo a legal act, anymore than he could unsign any of the bills Blagojevich signed. I wonder what Harry Reid will do now that the Illinois court failed to make it easy for him to back down. It will be interesting to see how he rationalizes it now.

dopplerd

Fri, 09 Jan 2009 15:44:47 -0600

By my reading of this the SC's announcement is a boost to Burris. The reason they rejected the writ is because the Sec of State doesn't need to certify the appointment. As such Burris has everything he needs to be our senator. Burris is our next senator. Time to get out the chisel and get carving on his tomb.

Albanyparkour

Fri, 09 Jan 2009 15:06:31 -0600

Clearly, the Illinois supreme court is a bunch of racists. As is the senate. As is anyone who disagrees with this flummery. When everyone you meet is an asshole, perhaps it's time to look inward.

UTV

Fri, 09 Jan 2009 14:31:43 -0600

I foresee a tremendous shitstorm with that. You think Bobby Rush is being an asshole now? Just wait until he rescinds the appointment of Roland "The Pharaoh" Burris.

CL

Fri, 09 Jan 2009 13:54:01 -0600

Good question. I'm not a lawyer, but I'll guess that it depends on the procedure for what will happen if Blago gets bounced. But aside from that, it'll probably be a mess and there would definitely be a case to see if Quinn could rescind an appointment.....but somehow I doubt that would happen given that the new US senate seems to want to GBTW fairly quick.

Albanyparkour

Fri, 09 Jan 2009 13:23:55 -0600

For the lawyers: If Blago gets bounced, can Quinn rescind the appointment if Burris has not yet been seated?