Jan 10 2009
Illinois Supreme Court Says No Signature Required for Burris Appointment
Former Illinois Attorney General Roland Burris just keeps getting closer and closer to that Senate seat, despite what Democratic leaders may say or do.
According to a recent story from MSNBC, the Illinois Supreme Court has ruled that the signature of the state’s secretary of state is not required in order for Burris to take his place in the world’s most deliberative body.
“Burris had asked the court to issue a writ of mandamus, which would force Secretary of State Jesse White to sign Burris’ appointment document,” report Zach Christman and Charlie Wojciechowski. “White has refused to sign the appointment issued by scandal-plagued Gov. Rod Blagojevich, saying any appointment made by the governor is tainted.”
The court said in its ruling that “The only issue before us is whether the Secretary of State, an official of this state, failed to perform an act required of him by the law of Illinois. He did not.”
Now the fate of Mr. Burris rests with the Senate. Sen. Dick Durbin has stated that no person can be appointed to the upper house unless both the governor and the secretary of state have signed on to the appointment. According to Durbin, the court’s decision “creates an impasse.” He wants the Senate to wait until the impeachment proceedings against Blagojevich are finished and then have his replacement (assuming the governor is actually removed from office) to appoint a new senator to fill President-elect Barack Obama’s seat.
However, the court disagrees with Durbin and says that it has “found nothing in the rules of the Senate that require the secretary of state’s signature.”
Jesse White, the secretary of state of Illinois, responded to the ruling by saying, “I could not and would not in good conscience sign my name to any appointment made by Gov. Rod Blagojevich to fill the Senate seat.”
“The ultimate decision to seat or not to seat the Senate appointee is left up to the United States Senate,” he added.
Burris reacted favorably to the ruling, saying in a statement that “I am very happy that the Supreme Court ruled supporting our argument that everything surrounding this appointment was legal and complete. This appointment meets the qualifications required by the U.S. Senate of all Gubernatorial appointees to fill vacated seats.”
So who is right and who is wrong? And what is the best thing to do? If Senate Democrats decide to seat Burris and Blagojevich turns out to be guilty of corruption, then the former attorney general will find himself under a cloud of suspicion and resentment throughout his term, despite the man’s qualifications and integrity. On the other hand, if Senate Democrats successfully block Burris from assuming his duties as the new appointee and Blagojevich turns out to be innocent, they will look like idiots and could be vulnerable to charges of racism.
“First of all, I don’t think Durbin wants to block Burris because he is a racist.”
I don’t say in my article that Durbin wants to block Burris because he is racist. I’m sure he’s not. What i said was that he’ll be ACCUSED of it probably in some quarters. And I suspect Rush isn’t the only one focusing on the race issue here. But we’ll have to wait and see.