Illinois Supreme Court Will Not Hear Blagojevich Removal Challenge

SPRINGFIELD, Ill. - Gov. Rod Blagojevich withstood a fellow Democrat's first attempt to have him quickly ousted from office when the state Supreme Court refused Wednesday to hear a challenge to his fitness to serve.

The court rejected, without comment, Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan's argument that the corruption scandal swirling around Blagojevich prevents him from properly doing his job.

Blagojevich was arrested last week on federal corruption charges, including allegations he tried to personally benefit from his sole authority to appoint President-elect Barack Obama's replacement in the U.S. Senate.

Madigan, a longtime Blagojevich foe and potential 2010 gubernatorial candidate, argued Blagojevich's legal problems amounted to a disability that necessitated him being temporarily removed from office and replaced by Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn.

"I am disappointed in the Illinois Supreme Court's decision," Madigan said Wednesday.

Madigan said Blagojevich's refusal to resign has put the state in an "unsustainable situation." She urged an Illinois House committee in Springfield that is considering whether to recommend impeaching the governor to act with "deliberate speed."

Quinn also expressed dismay, saying impeachment was the only remaining option.

"He hasn't gotten the message that his time as governor is up, it's time to leave," Quinn said.

Blagojevich spokesman Lucio Guerrero referred questions about the court's decision to Blagojevich's attorney, Ed Genson, who attended the impeachment committee's hearing Wednesday.

"I didn't think she should have filed it and I guess I was right," Genson said of Madigan's motion. "The Supreme Court doesn't want to, I don't believe, take over what the Legislature is either going to do or not going to do."

Genson, meanwhile, has asked the state to pay for Blagojevich's legal defense in the impeachment process.

In a motion filed with the House committee, Genson notes it's the attorney general's job to defend all proceedings against any state officer in his official capacity in any court.

But Madigan has a conflict of interest and cannot represent Blagojevich because she has called on him to resign and encouraged lawmakers to move to impeach him, Genson said. The state should therefore appoint and pay for Blagojevich's defense counsel of choice -- Genson and two other attorneys, according to the motion.

"I don't like it, but I think it's fair," Rep. Jack Franks, D-Woodstock, said of Genson being appointed special attorney general in the impeachment process. "This is about the governor in his official capacity. As such, he should receive counsel. This has nothing to do with his criminal case."

The state Republican Party called the Supreme Court's denial to take up Madigan's challenge to the governor a rallying cry for lawmakers to move swiftly against Blagojevich.

They want lawmakers to strip Blagojevich of his power to appoint Obama's successor and set a special election for the seat, but legislators haven't moved ahead on that front.

---

Madigan's full response:

I am disappointed in the Illinois Supreme Court's decision.

Because of Governor Blagojevich's refusal to resign, the State of Illinois is in an unsustainable situation. The serious criminal charges against Governor Blagojevich strike directly at the heart of his decision-making process and seriously impede his ability to legitimately exercise the powers of his office. Thus, while the U.S. Attorney's Office and the impeachment process move forward, the State is left with a Governor who cannot make effective decisions on critical and time-sensitive issues.

The Illinois Constitution expressly gives the Supreme Court the authority to determine whether the Governor has the ability to serve. Given this constitutional provision, on behalf of the People of the State of Illinois, I sought relief in the Illinois Supreme Court to temporarily remove Governor Blagojevich so that the State could continue to function while the U.S. Attorney and the General Assembly proceed. The Constitution does not require the Illinois Supreme Court to act.

I am hopeful that the General Assembly will act with deliberate speed. It is imperative that we begin to restore the People's confidence in their government.