[Roland Burris's] request for issuance of a writ of mandamus is denied [Read: No, you cannot have what it is that you want].Burris v. White (.pdf; 10 pgs.)
Mr. Burris issued a statement Friday saying, "I am very happy that the Supreme Court ruled supporting our argument that everything surrounding this appointment was legal and complete" [apart from denying our argument, that is].Power up that granite chisel one more time, this guy is the best.
Next stop, U.S. Senate Rule II (once again). It might be interesting to see how Harry Reid, a leader of the federal legislative branch, reacts to getting ordered around by some piker State's judicial branch.
2 comments:
So essentially, if a Secretary of State had a bug up their behind and refused to sign such a certificate after an election, they could hold up a duly elected official?
I assume this could get them into a bit of hot water, but it could throw Congress into a bit of a tizzy for a small period of time I suppose.
So essentially, if a Secretary of State had a bug up their behind and refused to sign such a certificate after an election, they could hold up a duly elected official?
No, what the Ill. Sup. Ct. is saying is the additional signature isn't required; it's not a necessary component of Illinois's executive authority.
And it's effectively telling Reid, "Your rule is toothless and irrelevant. It can't prevent Burris from assuming his seat."
Burris asked the court to order the signature, but the court has told him, "You don't need it, my son. Carry on; you're good to go. Trust us."
Post a Comment