Little Deadfish can't be mayor..boo hoo

I was very happy to see the Illinois Applette Court rule Rham “Deadfish” Emanuel, former hatchet man for B Hussein Obama coulnd't run for mayor in 2011 for multiple reasons. First it couldn’t have happened to a nicer guy. For a man who got his nickname for sending a fish wrapped in paper to a political rival and is famous (infamous) for getting into a heated political discussion with a naked represenative in the House of Represenative shower, getting snake bitten by the law is pure joy. But two parts of the decision I really find worthy of note:

...Consequently, we have neither a current supreme court directive, nor persuasive appellate court reasoning, compelling us to treat candidate residency requirements in the same manner as voter residency requirements, and we have some indications from the supreme court that the requirements might diverge. We must, therefore, ourselves interpret the Municipal Code’s use of the phrase "resided in" to determine if it should be construed as being synonymous with, or different from, the Election Code’s residency requirements for voters.

We begin this task by resort to familiar principles of statutory interpretation. For a court interpreting a statute, the primary goal is to ascertain and give effect to the intention ofthe legislature, and the best indicator of that intent is the statute’s language, given its plain and ordinary meaning. Cinkus,228 Ill.2d at 216…

How refreshing to see a judge actually say you must interpret the law as written and understood by it’s plain language, as opposed to the junior justice of the US Supreme Court who is convinced that “court of appeals is where policy is made." But I really love this part

To that end, the candidate argues that, regardless of whether he meets the candidate eligibility requirements of subsection 3.1-10-5(a) of the Municipal Code, he nonetheless may be qualified as a candidate by virtue of section 3-2 of the Election Code, which provides as follows:
"(a) A permanent abode is necessary to constitute a residence within the meaning of Section 3-1. No elector or spouse shall be deemed to have lost his or her residence in any precinct or election district in this State by reason of his or her absence on business of the United States, or of this State." 10 ILCS 5/3-2 (West 2008).

According to the candidate, he falls within this exception
because his absence from Chicago was attributable to his service as the Chief of Staff to the President of the United States. We agree with the candidate that his service constituted "business of the United States" and thus that this exception applies to him. We disagree, however, with his position that the exception saves his candidacy. In our view, the exception embodied by section 3-2 of the Election Code applies only to voter residency requirements, not to candidate residency requirements.
We base this conclusion largely on the plain language of the
Election Code. That plain language limits the reach of the
"business of the United States" exception to "elector[s]" or their spouses; it makes no mention of "candidates." Further, as we have noted, we must interpret statutes "as a whole, with each provision construed in connection with every other section." Cinkus, 228 Ill. 2d at 216-17. Section 3-2's "business of the United States" exception is housed not only in the Election Code, but in a portion of the Election Code dealing exclusively with voter qualification, in fact in an Article titled "Qualification of Voters." See 10 ILCS 5/3-1 through 3-5 (West 2008). As explained above, the Municipal Code sets forth two qualifications for candidates: they must meet the Election Code’s standards for a "qualified voter," and they must have "resided in" the municipality for one year preceding the election. The location of section 3-2's "business of the United States" exception--in the Election Code, and in an article of the Election Code dedicated exclusively to voter qualification--supports the conclusion that the exception applies only to the Election Code’s "qualified voter" standard, and not to any supplemental candidate qualifications located outside the
Election Code.

He’s qualified to vote in the elections, just not be voted for in this election. This is pure pleasure to read.

Maybe if little Rham wouldn’t have been so cheap and kept the house his “official” residence instead of leasing it…or maybe if he had had the leg’s of his tenant broken he could have had this issue “handled”…but for now (the Illinois Supreme Court has a history of finding law) he’s out.

Deadfish, you’re kinda smelly right now! And remember you always count your friends when times are bad...is BO flying in anytime soon?