More

Court's Strict Interpretation Of Illinois Residency Law In Rahm's Case A Shift From The Norm

Abe Obama Rahm

DON BABWIN   01/26/11 05:19 PM ET   AP

CHICAGO — If history unfolded differently, and Abraham Lincoln had served out his second term in the White House, could he have returned to Illinois to run for mayor of his hometown?

The response might have boiled down to this: Honest, Abe, you can't, unless you've lived in Springfield for a full year.

That's the issue hanging over Rahm Emanuel's run for Chicago mayor. And it's raising tough questions about how old residency rules should be interpreted in an era when Americans are so mobile.

The Illinois laws governing municipal elections are not unlike similar laws around the country. But the unusually strict interpretation by an appellate court this week would pose difficulties for many prospective officeholders whose careers take them for a time to Washington or to other countries.

The court on Monday threw Emanuel off the Chicago ballot, saying he could not run because he had been living for two years in Washington, where he was the White House chief of staff. Emanuel has appealed that decision to the Illinois Supreme Court.

But the same problem could arise for Education Secretary Arne Duncan, who once headed Chicago schools, or Emanuel's White House successor, Bill Daley, another Chicago native.

If Duncan wanted to run for mayor, "he's out under this," said Michael Dorf, a Chicago attorney and election law expert. "If Lincoln wanted to run for mayor of Springfield, sorry Abe."

Residency laws vary across the nation. To be mayor of New York, candidates just have to live in the city on the day they are elected. In other states, some office seekers must have been residents for five years.

But the appellate court in Illinois departed this week from most previous interpretations of election law when it said Emanuel needed to be physically present in Chicago for at least a year prior to the election, regardless of why he left or whether he intended to return.

Dawn Clark Netsch, a prominent Chicago Democrat who now teaches law at Northwestern University, said that ruling would stop even Chicago's most prominent political alum, President Barack Obama, who has only rarely returned to the city since taking office.

The court's new rationale, she added, had "never been thought of before."

The residency requirements have been on the books since 1818, the same year Illinois became a state. The legal language says a person is ineligible for an elected city office unless that person is a qualified voter in that city "and has resided in the municipality at least one year next preceding the election or appointment."

In the past, if candidates moved away, they could demonstrate an intention to return by leaving their voter registration and driver's license unchanged and keeping a home in the area – all of which Emanuel said he did.

Experts say a court has never simply ignored a candidate's intent.

"We've all been working under this absolute presumption based on cases of the last 50 years that intent was really the key," Dorf said. "But the appellate court got rid of intent totally."

Edward Foley, a law professor at Ohio State University who heads the school's election law program, said the court's decision to disregard intent was striking.

"There is a general theme in election law that when in doubt, you err on the side of democracy," he said. "If there is any doubt about the understanding of the statute, you interpret it so that you let the voters decide."

Both the Illinois election code and the state municipal code leave some questions unanswered.

The municipal code, for example, says people who have been away serving in the military cannot be disqualified from running for office. And a person does not lose residency if he or she is "on the business of the United States."

But, Dorf said, the court concluded those provisions applied to voting, not seeking office.

And, he said, while the law specifically says candidates must be residents of the city for 12 months, it does not define that, or say how many days in those 12 months a person must be in the city. Nor does it say if steps like maintaining one's voter registration are enough to demonstrate residency.

Appellate Justice Bertina Lampkin made the same point in her dissent of the 2-1 opinion, blasting fellow justices for not including "a single sentence" to explain what constitutes actual residency when discussing Emanuel's absence from Chicago.

"How many days may a person stay away from his home before the majority would decide he no longer 'actually resides' in it?" Lampkin wondered. "Would the majority have us pick a number out of a hat?"

Also unclear is just how many other municipal posts might be affected.

The election code does not list the jobs that might be considered the "business of the United States," but experts say it could include a tour in the Peace Corps, a job with a congressman in Washington or other government positions.

Illinois law stands in stark contrast to federal law, which allows candidates to run for Congress without establishing residency. In Illinois, Maryland resident Alan Keyes was drafted in 2004 to be Obama's Republican opponent for the Senate, after the original candidate dropped out.

"About the only time Keyes spent in Chicago was changing planes at O'Hare," said Kent Redfield, a professor emeritus of politics at the University of Illinois-Springfield.

If the appellate decision stands and Emanuel is cast out of the mayoral race, questions will linger about the wisdom of his decision to rent out his Chicago house instead of continuing to have his family live there. What if he had left it vacant so he could stay there whenever he returned to the city?

Dorf said he expects the Supreme Court to reverse the appellate decision.

If that doesn't happen, the effects will extend far beyond the circumstances of a White House aide who hustled back to the city when Mayor Richard Daley made his stunning announcement that he would not seek a seventh term.

"I think it creates a financial test for being able to run for office to the extent that if you can't afford to leave your place vacant for two years . you can't run," he said.

Andrew Finko understands all that. But Finko, an attorney who represented two people challenging Emanuel's residency, said the law clearly states that anyone who has not lived in the city for a full year before Election Day cannot run for mayor.

"You have to make your choices and you have to live with them," he said. "If you decide to go to Washington, that's your choice. You can't do everything."

___

Associated Press Writer Michael Tarm contributed to this report.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST CHICAGO

CHICAGO — If history unfolded differently, and Abraham Lincoln had served out his second term in the White House, could he have returned to Illinois to run for mayor of his hometown? The respon...
CHICAGO — If history unfolded differently, and Abraham Lincoln had served out his second term in the White House, could he have returned to Illinois to run for mayor of his hometown? The respon...
Filed by Jen Sabella  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 374
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (5 total)
01:34 PM on 01/27/2011
What would happen if a soldier came home (back to Chicago) from the Middle East, has been home less than a year, but decided to run for office? Would they say, sorry dude you were off working for the country and not technically at home in Chicago. I'm no uber fan of Rahm but it's pretty much the same situation, minus the valor.
10:46 AM on 01/27/2011
Rahm Emanuel goes with Chicago just as apple goes with pie. A perfect fit whether he wins or loses in the ballot box. But run he will or politics will duplicate Texas in fudging the facts. Dick Cheney was a resident of Texas until the facts disqualified him for running with Bush because they were both from Texas. He then was moved ( by fudgery ) to Montana ( ? ) to satisfy the Republican fact book. Texas and Chicago both are ruled by selective law enforcement.
12:57 PM on 01/27/2011
"Levittown," while commenting on Chicago politics, you seem to forget Chicago politics. This isn't about Democrats vs. Republicans. If he's not allowed to run, the other candidates who stand to gain are all Democrats.

Any mention of a "Republican fact book" in discussing this mayoral race is nothing short of a red herring.
10:14 AM on 01/27/2011
Regardless of the other points made in this article, there is a big difference between those who went to Washington because they were ELECTED to represent the people and Rahm, who went to Washington to take a job as part of DC bureaucracy. To act as if they are the same thing is intellectually dishonest. No one in Chicago - or anywhere - elected Rahm to represent them as White House Chief of Staff.
08:40 AM on 01/27/2011
Lincoln's family did not move with him to DC for the two years he served in the House. Travel was also more difficult and expensive in the 1800s. Plus Lincoln was serving as an elected official. The comparison between Rahm and Lincoln is ridiculous.
08:33 AM on 01/27/2011
Isn't it funny that the rules are suppose to apply to everyone else except Rahm. Rules are rules, and there is a very good reason for this rule. That is to make sure that if you are running for office, you are connected to the community. It is really pretty simple. If you rented out your home, then you weren't living there and therefore you did not maintain your residency. Is that really so hard to understand. The knife cuts both ways. I would bet you that most of the pro-Rahm posters here would have the opposite opinion in reguard to the residency rule when it comes to city employees needing to live within the city limits or sending your children to public schools when the children live outside the school district. It sickens me when certain people think that rules are meant to be followed by everyone else but them. It happens so often when someone is in big business, politics, or just famous.
08:02 AM on 01/27/2011
One argues that it would become hard to know how long a person could be away and still "reside" under the majority's decision.
Unfortunately, if you take the opposite stance, you would end up having to define who is considered being on business of the US. The White House cook? Bo's trainer? The cashier at the Congressional cafeteria? I consider those being business of the US.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Joe H Woods Menefee
08:43 AM on 01/27/2011
Chief of Staff for the President of the United States, if that's not business of the government, what else could you call it. Blows my mind they voted him ineligible.
08:53 AM on 01/27/2011
Because the business of the United States only applied to eligibility to vote; after all it is in the Election Code and not the Municipal Code.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dkrypt
Unencumbered by political correctness
07:58 AM on 01/27/2011
Chicago really needs a guy like Rahm with his reputation for goodness and honesty. He'll definitely clean up the corruption over there.
08:04 AM on 01/27/2011
Smirk or smile?
07:57 AM on 01/27/2011
I would have gotten away with it if it wasn't for you meddling lawyers.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
07:27 AM on 01/27/2011
I'm not sure whether I want to support public service (i.e.: allowing Mr. Emanuel candidcy) or support broadening of the political class (by disallowing high profile individuals from hopping from office to office) - or support broadening of the political class (by allowing the disruptive effects of Mr. Emanuel's candidacy on the Chicago political establishment.)

In any event, this whole issue is local politics - neither liberal nor conservative - where one faction is fighting another.
07:16 AM on 01/27/2011
If Rahm's residency is based on voting from his rented-out address, then what voting address are his tenants supposed to use? Is this how Chicago gets its reputation for 2 for 1 voting?

In our state, Landlords aren't allowed to vote from tenants address.

While we certainly don't want Rahm back working in the WH, it sure wouldn't make us cry if his arrogance left him in a position to truly understand the plight of the unemployed!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mummblemouth
07:29 AM on 01/27/2011
You should be able to vote from a rented address so long as you consider that your permanent address. You can even vote from an address that used to be, but is no longer yours. You cannot, however, claim to have two permanent addresses and then vote twice. For example, when I go overseas, I use my last known address here so that I can continue to vote. Now, and I'm not a fan of Rahm, but I would say that being called upon to serve as the president's chief of staff is an adequate reason for being away from your permanent address and he should still be considered a resident.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
peegan
Obama 2012
07:44 AM on 01/27/2011
While I agree with most of what you say, I am getting tired of hearing about how he was "called upon to serve the President." He was offered a well paying high profile job in Washington and he chose to accept it.
10:19 AM on 02/01/2011
I think where Rahm got caught up was that he forgot he wasn'ta Congressman. Usually, Congressmen maintain a permanent address in the district, but might keep a temporary address in D.C. area. They remain residents of their home state and their tax forms back it up, as well.

Arch conservative Rick Santorum moved his family to a house he bought in Virginia but got into a snafu involving Pennsylvania school monies and his expenses for internet tuition covering his 6 (homeschooled) kids. Residency questions led to questions about eligibility for PA taxpayer-supported school money during his last run for US Senate. I think he won the residency question, but he lost the election.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Mariosright
I can name the newspapers I read
07:50 AM on 01/27/2011
So the landlord lives downstairs and the tenet lives in upstairs apartment. By your explanation, one does not get to vote.
Also, if they did both vote, that is not 2 for 1 voting. It is each person gets one vote.
Nice try though.
10:05 AM on 02/01/2011
The U.S. Postal Service would consider each apartment a separate address (e.g., 21 A and 21B).

It is my understanding that Rahm rented out his single family home to non-relatives and he is NOT living with those people at the house now, or later even (tell me if this info is wrong). So during the time that those people inhabited his former residence and considered it THEIR legal address for voting purposes, it would be naiive to think that it would remain Rahm's legal and permanent address.

Many people own multiple homes in my state, but only ONE can be the primary residence for voting and homeowner tax benefits. Many people fail to change their address when they move, as well, and therefore they might atttempt to vote at their old poll location. That is why there are "election challengers" entitled to sit at the table and flag them. When flagged, a judge can immediately determine the voter's eligibility.

I had a relative who was new to the neighborhood and flagged by an election challenger. He was taken to the superior court judge on duty for election day who verified his eligibility to vote. He balked at taking up the judge's time, to which the judge responded: "you are a very important person, Mr. _____; today (election day) is all about you."
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
artist-53
Wordy opinionated poor spelling Liberal
07:00 AM on 01/27/2011
Rahm Emanuel was "Appointed" to Serve as White House Chief of Staff". It's not as if he decided to leave Chicago to find a job. He was Appointed to Serve the President for his expertise, and the word Appointment, is just that, an appointment. Which denotes that it's not a forever life long position.

I think he ought not be penalized because he was asked by the President of the United States to "serve". He should be able to run for Mayor.

"I am pleased to announce that my good friend, Congressman Rahm Emanuel, has agreed to serve as my White House chief of staff. I announce this appointment first because the Chief of Staff is central to the ability of a President and Administration to accomplish an agenda. And no one I know is better at getting things done than Rahm Emanuel._President Obama,10-27-08 02:36
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/27/obamas-chief-of-staff-rah_n_138240.html
08:06 AM on 01/27/2011
agreed to serve... Meaning he had a choice. Military personnel have no choice. He is no hero for taking a job, just like all of us do.
08:45 AM on 01/27/2011
I disagree, in times of no draft, it is a choice to enlist. Nobody has to enlist in the military, people forget that. In the South, where I live, most people enlist not out of some trumped up sense of patriotic duty but to escape the oppressive economic situation and to take advantage of all the great government programs being offered.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
artist-53
Wordy opinionated poor spelling Liberal
09:36 AM on 01/27/2011
There is quite a difference between a "Draft" and "Appointment". For starters, one begins with a D and the other begins with an A:-)

I just think the courts ought to give consideration to the fact that the guy didn't exactly blow out of town to get a job selling shoes out side of home State..

He was asked to fulfill a appointment in Gov. is all. The appointment ran shorter than anticipated I guess, and came to a close,and now he's back home. So for that he can't run as Mayor?

I don't live there and obviously won't be voting there, but lets be reasonable, even if you don't care for him, it's still a matter of principal, and he ought to be allowed to run for Mayor.
11:28 PM on 01/27/2011
The appointment did not run shorter than anticipated and it did not "come to a close." Emanuel ended his tenure as White House chief of staff specifically to return to Chicago and run for mayor. If Mayor Daley had not announced his resignation in October, Rahm Emanuel would still live in DC. He does not fit the description of resident because unless he was running for mayor, he still wouldn't reside here!
06:59 AM on 01/27/2011
If following the law is the departure from the norm for the author of this article, then how low does he think of Chicago politics?

And to answer to the opening salvo of the article, if law in the times of Lincoln had demanded 1 year residency to run for mayor, honest Abe would never even thought to brake it and to run for mayor of his hometown immediately after leaving Washington DC.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Patriot86
Compassion is the basis of all morality.
07:17 AM on 01/27/2011
Really and how about West Virginia? You all talk out of both sides of your mouth.
08:35 AM on 01/27/2011
What in West Virginia?

If it is on US and not in USSR, then law must be respected there as well.

But what about Washington DC, where dude in the White House can not prove his eligibility to be a POTUS?
cabinetmaker
made in USA
06:57 AM on 01/27/2011
same 'ol, same 'ol change the rules ti fit libs wants

it is special treatment cuz we all know he didn't LIVE there!
07:08 AM on 01/27/2011
Don't tar the libs with Rahm's arrogance.

Libs don't like him either.

At his D.C. goodbye party, the nicest thing anyone could say about him was that he was a raunchy cusser.

Mayor Daley's ancestor sicked the cops with billy clubs on the libs who protested at the 68 convention. Chicago's politics have been a sour taste for libs for a long time.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
artist-53
Wordy opinionated poor spelling Liberal
07:09 AM on 01/27/2011
He was "Appointed to a position" by the President, and why should he be penalized for accepting that appointment?

If you want to talk about changing the rules, what about GWB and rules of engagement for war? GWB relied on false information created by his administration. I would say that sort of trumps all, in the world of Changing the rules.
05:58 AM on 01/27/2011
Dorf missed what the ruling said. They didn't dispel the exemptions, per se.

The municipal code says that to run, you must be 1)an elector and 2) have resided continuously for 12 months. These are 2 separate requirements. In that same section of the code, it explains the military exemption (it is subsection d while the above requirements are a). They acknowledge that military personnel ARE clearly eligible to run for office. Using that, they defer to how in that subsection, the word RESIDE actually means live physically (this is because the statute describes how military lose residence when deployed). Since a and d are in the same section, that would imply RESIDE means physically live in part a as well, meaning you have to physically live in the city for 12 months. They also go on to explain the legislative history and the intent of the law writers.

The reason why the "business of United States" exemption did not apply is because it is not even close to being in that section. It is contained in a provision that explains eligibility to become an elector, which only satisfies the first part of the requirements to run. If an exemption for being away on US business was wanted to satisfy the 12 month requirement, it would have been included in the other section; but it wasn't.

So military personnel can still run for mayor, but not those on official US business.
photo
Celtic Hawk
Independent
05:36 AM on 01/27/2011
This Abe/Rahm comparison is hypothetical and wrong.

Rahm is not an elected official.

He is a paid employee, who took a job in Washington and moved there.

Chicago will survive with someone else as mayor...I promise.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
oxygen
love is like oxygen
06:49 AM on 01/27/2011
let him run back to his other country he loves so much - something I am sure Abe Lincoln would have never ever done