Senator Burris, it is official

[SuperTrouper]

Illinois Supreme Court says: Burris does not need the signature of the Secretary of State to be Senator. So, Blago and Burris get away with it and now Burris can sit next to Durbin in the US Senate

[Bolo Boffin]

1. I couldn't imagine that they'd rule any other way.

Now it goes to the Senate Rules Committee because they say they need the SECSTATE signature, but that should be a formality since the Ill. Supreme has ruled like this. The law is the law, and this incident really does show the nuttiness of putting a decision like this strictly in the hands of one person, with no advise and consent requirement whatsoever.

[Occam Bandage]

2. I'm disappointed that a Blago pick will be seated, but glad that illegal obstructionism didn't work,

and more than either I'm frustrated that the IL state legislature sat on its hands.

[Thrill]

3. Actually they rejected Burris trying to make the Sec of State sign it

Now its up to Jesse White to sign it to satisfy the US Senate.

[suston96]

4. Here is the link to the story.....

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2009/01/state-court-rebuffs-burris-on-senate-signature.html

But Illinois Supreme Court Justice Lloyd A. Karmeier said White's signature was not needed for Burris to be seated in the Senate.

"We note...that nothing in the published rules of the Senate, including Rule II, appears to require that Senate appointments made by state executives pursuant to the 17th amendment must be signed and sealed by the state's secretary of state. Moreover, no explanation has been given as to how any rule of the Senate, whether it be formal or merely a matter of tradition, could supersede the authority to fill vacancies conferred on the states by the federal constitution. Under these circumstances, the Senate's actions cannot serve as the predicate for a mandamus action against the Secretary of State. 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."

[Ken Burch]

5. Well, the sad thing is this is probably the sort of guy Blago should have picked to start with

And the sort who would have told Blago to pound sand and peddle it walking if Blago brought up the bribe thing.

Why didn't Blago just go with Burris in the first place?

[Merlot]

6. "Blago and Burris get away with it?"

Get away fith following the law?

Blago has broken many other laws, and probably should not have appointed Burris. And Blago had the legal standing to appoint the replacement.

But Burris has done nothing illegal.

[vaberella]

63. Exactly. n/t

[Phx_Dem]

7. Nope, not yet. It's actually become a little harder for Burris

to be seated. He has to have the IL Sec of State sign it. In the meantime, Blago has been impeached and his Senate trial looms. If they boot him, the Lt. Gov. can choose to seat someone else. I'm betting the Sec of State will hold off until the Senate finishes their trial. If Blago is removed, he won't sign it. If he is not removed, he probably will.

[goodhue]

8. Why does he have to have the Sec of State sign?

eom

[slick8790]

9. Secretary of Senate requires it. n/t

[goodhue]

10. we'll see

eom

[WeDidIt]

12. The IL SC has no jurisdiction over the United States Senate

So if the US Senate requires the SOS signature and won't seat without it, there ain't doodly the IL SC can say about their procedures and Burris would have to take it to the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals.

[goodhue]

16. Indeed, but the IL SC nonetheless noted the absence of any such Senate rule

Assertion of such a rule Tuesday was simply another CYA bluff by Senate leadership

[slick8790]

18. Regardless, the ILSC has no jurisdiction.

They cannot compel the US Senate to seat him. When this goes to a federal court, it may have some weight.

[goodhue]

20. Do you honestly think Durbin/Reid are going to let this go to Federal Court?

Their bluff has been called twice now, so I can't imagine any further resistance to seating Burris.

[slick8790]

21. What do they have to lose?

Polls have shown a majority of the public is against seating Burris. Public opinion is behind them on this.

[goodhue]

26. time, money, credibility

[slick8790]

29. No, I'd argue they lose more credibility by giving up now.

And like I said, public opinion is behind them. The public won't view the time and money spent on this as a waste.

[WeDidIt]

31. Agreed, plus, if they wait a couple of weeks, Quinn will be governor

Quinn could tehn appoint a successor, White could sign, and Reid could immediately seat which would head Burris off at the pass.

[goodhue]

41. Actually, they gave up Tuesday

The reference to credentials was just to save a little face . . .

[WeDidIt]

23. They might. Their excuse was they needed the signature

The IL SC says they don't. They asserted they did. If they back out now, they look even more foolish.

They almost HAVE to push this. It's obvious they hoped the IL SC would compel White to sign.

[goodhue]

27. They were wrong, They were simply pointing to senate rule about elections

There is no such senate rule relative to appointments

[WeDidIt]

36. Doesn't matter, if Reid wants to, he can still refuse to seat

and still use his ready made excuse because White's signature is not on the appointment.

Only a federal court order could compel him to seat.

[goodhue]

39. Actually, it would be up to the Senate Rules Committee . . .

http://rules.senate.gov/public/





The Rules Committee is one of the oldest committees of the United States Senate. Our origins date back to the early days of the Republic. Our origins date back to the early days of the Republic when the first Senate convened in March 1789 and establishged a committee to prepare a system of rules for conducting business in the Senate. In 1867 in the aftermath of the Civil War and the reunification of our Union, the forerunner to our current committee was created, and a Committee on Rules has continued in the Senate to the present day.

We invite you to use this website to learn more about the Senate Rules Committee – our purpose, jurisdiction, oversight and duties . . .

http://rules.senate.gov/public/

[WeDidIt]

43. No, Reid can refuse to seat if there's no signature

but the IL SC has given Burris a way around this in the ruling:

There is one final point we feel constrained to mention. While the Secretary of State has no duty under Illinois law to sign and affix the state seal to the certificate of appointment issued by the Governor, he does have a duty under section 5(4) of the Secretary of State Act (15 ILCS 305/5(4) (West 2006)) "to give any person requiring the same paying the lawful fees therefor, a copy of any law, act, resolution, record or paper in his office, and attach thereto his certificate, under the seal of the state."

The registration of the appointment of Mr. Burris made by the Secretary of State is a "record or paper" within the meaning of this statute. A copy of it is available from the Secretary of State to anyone who requests it. For payment of the normal fee charged by the Secretary of State in accordance with this statute, Petitioners could obtain a certified copy bearing the state’s seal. Because such relief is possible, no order by this court is necessary or appropriate.

If I was Burris, I'd be at the SOS office getting a copy and paying the fee for White's signature and the seal.

[goodhue]

45. You say it is up to Reid, I say it is up to Rules Committee

We shall see

[WeDidIt]

48. Uncertified, it's actually up to the Secretary of the Senate

but the remedy is spelled out in the IL SC decision.

So as soon as he has a certified copy of the appointment, you are correct. It would then be up to the Rules committee, though I beleive he would be seated with a certified copy and no rules committee ruling since that was Reid's excuse for not seating this week.

[goodhue]

14. The Illinois Supreme Court addressed this alleged "requirement"

http://www.state.il.us/COURT/Opinions/SupremeCourt/2009/January/107816.pdf

In their pleadings, Petitioners suggest that the United States
Senate has taken the view that the Governor’s signed, hand-delivered
certificate of appointment is insufficient to meet the requirements of
the Senate’s own internal rules. We note, however, that nothing in the
published rules of the Senate, including Rule II, appears to require
that Senate appointments made by state executives pursuant to the
seventeenth amendment must be signed and sealed by the state’s
secretary of state. Moreover, no explanation has been given as to how
any rule of the Senate, whether it be formal or merely a matter of
tradition, could supercede the authority to fill vacancies conferred on
the states by the federal constitution.

[WeDidIt]

22. That doesn't matter

The Illinois Supreme Court's sentiments about Senate rules have no authority over the United States Senate.

So Reid would look worse than he already does if he seats without the signature. His hope was the IL SC would compel White to sign.

[goodhue]

30. Reid's hope was misplaced once again

eom

[WeDidIt]

32. Reid can still say, "no signature from White, no seat"

and there isn't thing one the IL SC could do to stop it.

[AZ Criminal JD]

51. Since when does Secretary of Senate choose Senators?

[Fire1]

59. Wrong. Even the SOS stated his signature was not needed.

[Phx_Dem]

15. I just read something different that what I heard on MSNBC

so now I'm confused. Disregard my above post because I don't know what the hell is going on.

:think:

[goodhue]

19. It's pretty simple--Burris won in IL state supreme court

And the Senate was just making stuff up Tuesday, as they have been all along

[WeDidIt]

24. The IL SC has no jurisdiction to determine anything about the rules of the

US Senate.

[goodhue]

28. what rule?

[Phx_Dem]

33. Reid's "rule" that he can't accept Burris unless his

certificate is signed by the IL Sec of State. The IL Supremes say it's not necessary, he's legal. Crazy Harry Reid says, not so fast.

All I know is that whichever side Harry Reid is on will lose.

[WeDidIt]

34. The one Reid claims exists

The IL SC ruling today has precisely no power to compel the Senate to seat Burris.

If Reid wants to fight this, Burris must take it to the US Court of Appeals.

[goodhue]

42. The Rule exists, it is its interpretation that is the open question . . .

http://rules.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=RulesOfSenate.View&Rule_id=45831f40-f4a1-4348-b332-63479dd3a55a&CFID=1570487&CFTOKEN=41749250

Standing Rules of the Senate
RULE II
PRESENTATION OF CREDENTIALS AND QUESTIONS OF PRIVILEGE

1. The presentation of the credentials of Senators elect or of Senators designate and other questions of privilege shall always be in order, except during the reading and correction of the Journal, while a question of order or a motion to adjourn is pending, or while the Senate is voting or ascertaining the presence of a quorum; and all questions and motions arising or made upon the presentation of such credentials shall be proceeded with until disposed of.

2. The Secretary shall keep a record of the certificates of election and certificates of appointment of Senators by entering in a wellbound book kept for that purpose the date of the election or appointment, the name of the person elected or appointed, the date of the certificate, the name of the governor and the secretary of state signing and countersigning the same, and the State from which such Senator is elected or appointed.

3. The Secretary of the Senate shall send copies of the following recommended forms to the governor and secretary of state of each State wherein an election is about to take place or an appointment is to be made so that they may use such forms if they see fit.

* * *

http://rules.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=RulesOfSenate.View&Rule_id=45831f40-f4a1-4348-b332-63479dd3a55a&CFID=1570487&CFTOKEN=41749250

[SuperTrouper]

25. Wait, Gore won over Bush in FL Supremes but SCOTUS overrode it and selected Bush

[WeDidIt]

37. Bingo!

This all comes down to Reid. Reid claimed the signature was required. The IL SC says it ain't. Reid can still say, "oh yes it is and lacking a signature I cannot seat Mr. Burris."

It would then go to the federal court level.

Reid could easily, if he so chose, drag it out long enough for Blagojevich to be throw out of office (2 to 3 more weeks), let Quinn appoint somebody, White signs off on that appointment, and Reid seats.

And it could all happen before Burris can get to a level where Reid has no choice but to seat.

[BlooInBloo]

56. It's funny when people just make shit up.

[WeDidIt]

11. Over under on when Burris gets indicted?

Things have started looking fishy with the appointment.

BTW, the Illinois Supreme Court has no jurisdiction over the United States Senate. I wonder if Reid will still refuse.

[SuperTrouper]

50. If Reid wants to be a jerk, he will refuse

[WI_DEM]

13. The IL Supreme Court is correct. Blago is the legally elected governor and still in office

and had a right to make that appointment. The senate should swear him in asap.

[Iwillnevergiveup]

17. Godspeed, Senator Burris

If you don't particularly distinguish yourself with any profound, trailblazing, progressive legislation, please just vote correctly. Every time. Thank you.

[rug]

35. Good All the posturing was stupid.

[WeDidIt]

38. IT is NOT official

Until Burris is actually seated, it ain't official.

Reid still has the option to say, "no signature from White, no seat." and there isn't a dmaned thing the IL SC can do to stop him.

It all comes down to Reid.

So I say, until Burris is actually seated, it's not official.

[goodhue]

44. I guess we will just have to wait and see what Rules Chair Feinstein thinks . . .

eom

[WeDidIt]

46. The IL SC gave Burris an easy out in the ruling, though...

There is one final point we feel constrained to mention. While the Secretary of State has no duty under Illinois law to sign and affix the state seal to the certificate of appointment issued by the Governor, he does have a duty under section 5(4) of the Secretary of State Act (15 ILCS 305/5(4) (West 2006)) "to give any person requiring the same paying the lawful fees therefor, a copy of any law, act, resolution, record or paper in his office, and attach thereto his certificate, under the seal of the state."

The registration of the appointment of Mr. Burris made by the Secretary of State is a "record or paper" within the meaning of this statute. A copy of it is available from the Secretary of State to anyone who requests it. For payment of the normal fee charged by the Secretary of State in accordance with this statute, Petitioners could obtain a certified copy bearing the state’s seal. Because such relief is possible, no order by this court is necessary or appropriate.

Burris could head to the Thompson Center in Chicago today and pick up his certified copy of the appointment for a nominal fee.

That would head Reid off at the pass.

[goodhue]

47. Yes but Reid isn't heading to any pass

He is already in retreat

[WeDidIt]

49. If I was Burris, I'd just go ahead and do it.

IT'll cost a small amount, but there will be no built in excuse any longer.

[SuperTrouper]

52. and his Mausoleum needs a new line

[Phoonzang]

40. Fine...whatever...just seat him and end the drama and the media feeding frenzy. nt

[davidpdx]

53. I hope the whole drama with Burris ends soon

Then Blago can get impeached and we can be done with the whole thing.

All we need after that is Coleman to get his ear tossed out in court over his dumb lawsuit and then Fraken can be seated and we'll have our 59 Senators.

[Fire1]

54. Good! Next on the agenda...................

[IsItJustMe]

55. My hunch is that Dick Durbin is trying to continue this sharade becuase he wants Tammy Duckworth to

have Obama's vacant seat rather than Burris, and old Dick, a little big headed from the Democratic victory this election, is feeling his oats and wants to stir up some shit. This is going to come back on the Democrats in a bad way though, so I hope Dick gets with the program.

[Pierre.Smooth]

60. Tanny Duckworth?

In the words of Nate Silver, over at www.fivethrityeight.com, "Illinois has seen alot of Tammy Duckworth, and to be frank, Illinois doesn't like what she sees" Or something to that effect! :-) Good Post....

[ecstatic]

57. Will Illinois have a democratic primary in 2010 or is Burris

automatically the nominee if he chooses to run? :shrug:

[AZ Criminal JD]

58. There will be a primary in March, 2010

Anybody can run in it and there will probably be quite a few. Any candidate can start collecting signatures to gain access to the ballot in September, 2009 and they are filed in late December, 2009.

[Pierre.Smooth]

61. Burris and the circus surrounding him

In legal terms, "taint" has no meaning. And politics is a tough sport. But I regret that Burris didn't have the sense to say, ahem channeling Palin, "Thanks, but no thanks!" and keeping his dignity. But Burris is an old warrior who feels like he is being rewarded here on here, and not having to wait till Heaven.

It's a sad thing. He can't win in 2010. And as an AA male, I think he played race to the detriment of the Illinois Dem Party! And don't get me started on Blago, what a clown. Sigh.

[Sultana]

62. Blah, when does that seat go up for election?