This is a strong indication that the court will accept the case and, perhaps, of which way the justices are leaning.Chicago politics -- there's never a dull moment. And I'll bet neither Mr. Chico nor Ms. Mosely-Braun are happy about this news.
Yippee, Skippy!
Rahm's back on the ballot for now:
Tuesday, January 25, 2011 |
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
The ordinary standard for an injunction is 1) Is the appellant likely to succeed on appeal (sometimes read as "not unlikely"), and 2) Will the appellant be irreparably harmed if the injunction is not issued? If both 1 and 2 are so, then the injunction should be issued.
On point one, the legal definition of "residence" is a bit of a conundrum: His regular home has been in DC for the last two years, but he's been paying taxes as an Illinois resident. On the second point, he would certainly be irreparably harmed by not having his name on the ballot. So the court decided, even before deciding to take the case, to issue a temporary injunction. That seems a gimme, even though I think he sucks.
Actually, I have a
better candidate (http://internet-pets.blogspot.com/2011/01/he-should-be-next-mayor-of-chicago.html)
Post a Comment