Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 8:22 AM ET, 01/25/2011

White House: Obama believes Rahm Emanuel can run for mayor

By Emi Kolawole

Updated 1:11p.m.:

The Illinois Supreme Court has issued a stay on the appellate court decision to remove Rahm Emanuel's name from the Chicago mayoral ballot. The state's high court has also instructed that
Emanuel's name continue to be printed on the ballots while they take up his motion for an appeal.

-- Aaron Blake & Emi Kolawole
----------------

White House senior adviser Valerie Jarret appeared on ABC's "Good Morning America" Tuesday with some insight as to where the president stands regarding his former chief of staff Rahm Emanuel's having been booted from the Chicago mayoral ticket by an appellate court ruling.

"I think that he believes that he is eligible, and that he believes that Rahm will pursue his appeal in the courts," Jarrett said.

An Illinois appellate court ruled Monday that Rahm Emanuel cannot run for mayor of Chicago, a decision that shocked the city's political establishment and triggered a rapid appeal from the former White House chief of staff to the state Supreme Court.

Watch Emanuel's Monday press conference regarding the court's ruling:

(h/t The Hill)

More from PostPolitics:
-- Emmanuel: I will fight court ruling
-- OPINION: Rahm Emanuel got robbed
-- The Fix: Rahm Emanuel ruled ineligible for mayor's ballot, vows to fight ruling

By Emi Kolawole  | January 25, 2011; 8:22 AM ET
Categories:  44 The Obama Presidency  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Scalia's closed-door session with lawmakers proves light on politics, attendees say
Next: Ed Rendell joins NBC News as political analyst

Comments

Here it is 2011, and STILL with all this technology we can't keep someone not eligible to run for mayor of chicago off the ballot. They just do whatever they want to do. Only we the little people have to adhere to the correct procedures.

Posted by: 2eachisown | January 25, 2011 7:30 PM | Report abuse


When I worked for an Indiana congressman in DC, I legally maintained my Indiana driver's license, my Indiana license plates, my Indiana voter registration, my Indiana jury duty responsibilities, filed Indiana state tax returns, and was eligible for Indiana in-state tuition when I returned for graduate school. Even though I lived in Washington, DC for 2 years and did not own real estate in Indiana, I was serving a federally elected official and still was a legal resident of Indiana.

The Illinois appellate court decision is simply dirty Chicago politics. Of course, Rahm Emanuel is and always has been a legal resident of Illinois.


Posted by: SCOTTSCHMIDTT | January 25, 2011 12:34 PM | Report abuse

Here we go again.
Our very stupid president sticking his nose in where it has no business, just like the african american that the police arrested that time.
Obumba needs to keep his nosey nose out of thgings that don't concern him.
Just because Ralph was a white house lacky, he does not deserve any special priveledges.
KEEP YOUR NOSE OUT OF BUSINESS THAT DOESN'T CONCERN YOU OBAMA.

Posted by: JimW2 | January 25, 2011 12:26 PM | Report abuse

Desetdiva1,

There isn't one shred of CREDIBLE evidence that President Obama is a corrupt politician. FYI-Rush Limbaugh's or Glenn Beck's lunatic rants are not credible evidence.

Posted by: hateisnotafamilyvalue | January 25, 2011 11:34 AM | Report abuse

@withersb - so what? Why is someone who served in Washington necessarily more qualified to be a candidate for a local office than someone local? Each jurisdiction should make their own judgements about who can qualify for elective office within that jurisdiction, regardless of whether it suits the interests of people serving in the federal government. Then let candidates make their cases and let the people decide. This whole attitude, highlighted by the Rahm candidacy, that Washington service trumps anything else is obnoxious. Life requires making choices. RE chose a path which did not qualify him to be a candidate for mayor of Chicago, by law, and now he has to live with the consequences.

Posted by: Illini | January 25, 2011 10:48 AM | Report abuse

While the right wing is crowing about this they might consider that it will make it much more difficult for future Presidents, Republican or Democrat, to staff the cabinet positions, White House, etc. because members of both parties have long maintained thier legal residents in thier home states and frequently returned to run for office.

Posted by: withersb | January 25, 2011 10:26 AM | Report abuse

Oh course one corrupt Chicago politician thinks another corrupt Chicago politician has the legal right to run for Mayor. Rahm represents Obama's best option for a job after the 2012 election.

Posted by: Desertdiva1 | January 25, 2011 10:18 AM | Report abuse

So we now take the opinion of a former Chicago slumlord seriously?

Posted by: LibsRlost | January 25, 2011 10:05 AM | Report abuse

Rah rah Rahm! Rah Rah Rahm!!! Go tell 'em rahmmy! We need an Isrealli Senator to replace the senator from Connecticut who is retiring. Who else will guide this godless nation to serve the chosen people?

Posted by: yard80197 | January 25, 2011 10:00 AM | Report abuse

@hebintn
Rahm Emanuel was not asked to serve this country, he was asked to serve President Obama, Rahm Emanuel is NOT a US Military Servicemen, and being Chief of Staff is NOT equivilent to being part of the military. It's also not an ELECTED office. He serves at the pleasure of the President. Your logic is seriously flawed.

@eprobst
in the same sentence that you said the country has become mean spirited about politics you call 50% (we know who you mean) stupid. How do you reconcile the two without being a hypocrite?

Further that, the court decision is not part of the discourse you are decrying. It isn't political in nature, it's about eligibility and residency.

Just because a court decision doesn't go your way doesn't mean one political party had something to do with it.

Also, didn't President Obama ask the court to remove opponents from his election in Chicago due to residency? Hmmmm.. how quickly they forget.

For the record, I couldn't care less about this election as I am not a resident and I do not have an opinion about how well Rahm Emanuel would do as mayor but it seems to me that those who are upset about it are using politics and not the other way around.

Posted by: gormly | January 25, 2011 9:57 AM | Report abuse

Obama also thinks he is god, but that doesnt make it true

Posted by: zzapperz | January 25, 2011 9:53 AM | Report abuse

He was not serving his country he was serving the president by promoting his agenda and manipulating lawmakers votes. He was not elected. He voluntarily moved his family to DC, his wife took a job there, his children enrolled in school. He was not a resident of Chicago for the necessary year. His home was rented out and he tried to reneg on that when it was convenient for him because Daley decided not to run again. People who live in IL and work in IN pay taxes to IN when they work there, not because they are residents. He may have planned to come back to Chicago but there was no deadline until Daley's announcement. For a change the dems will have to play by the same rules they have used against others. Too bad, so sad.

Posted by: TaxpayerIL | January 25, 2011 9:48 AM | Report abuse

Yes, I realize we're talking about Chicago (wink wink) but do they really allow people who don't live there to vote there? Are they really able to collect income taxes from people who don't live or worh there? I think the voting rolls and tax rolls say he lived there and continues to live there. And they should refund every penny hge paid in taxes, as he has a court order that says he's not a resident.

Posted by: scottilla | January 25, 2011 9:37 AM | Report abuse

What an outrage! This administration are the biggest bunch of cowardly bullies I've ever seen. Why don't they just dissolve the whole judicial branch of Gov't (or just put them under Eric Holder's rule).

These Obama thugs are proud of their law bending ways and then love to boss the judicial around when the judges don't rule in favor. Last year, in Obama's SOTU speech he was brash enough to brow-beat the Supreme Court Justices. This year I expect he'll spare the words and just take them out to the woodshed. I hate their arrogance and if Obama starts dishing out tongue lashings at the SOTU speach, I hope the affected parties get gutsy and walk out. This admin needs to have their wings trimmed and maybe the judicial branch will really lean on them in the near future. Please God! Give us a sign that the big O isn't quite your equal yet.

Posted by: donclampett | January 25, 2011 9:35 AM | Report abuse

"If he really truly wanted to be mayor from the get go, he could have quit the CoS job (or not taken it in the first place) and established his residency in Chicago to avoid this issue altogether."
__________________

And he wouldn't have extended the lease on his house well into this year so he could have moved right back in after leaving the White House. As the court said, owning a house & living in it are 2 different things & the qualifications to run for office are more stringent than those for voting.

Posted by: ArtNJr | January 25, 2011 9:14 AM | Report abuse

Did you know the headline on the front page is "44: Obama's reax to ruling on Emanuel's mayoral bid?" You've got to be kidding me. "Reax?" What the ...

Posted by: mcintire78 | January 25, 2011 9:11 AM | Report abuse

Getting opponents kicked off the ballot for the strict election laws of Illinois is how Obama got elected the first time in Chicago. Obama got all of his opponents kicked off the ballot so only he could win in the same way Rahm is being kicked off the ballot. Rahm, the Bomb, tried this previously himself but was not successful. This is simply the way things are done in Chicago. Emanuel is not a victim of anything he and Obama didn't do themselves to others and legally according to the laws under which they operated. Rahm should just have to suck it up and President Obama has no business inteferring in this hypocritical way when the same laws he used are working against his friend Rahm. The President of the United States is shamefully trying to influence a local election. That is dangerously wrong.

Posted by: mlbduffy | January 25, 2011 9:11 AM | Report abuse

The election law in Chicago makes a clear distinction between voter eligibility and eligibility for candidacy, so being eligible to vote does not necessarily mean you are eligible to be on the ballot. The law also makes a specific exception for those on active duty in the armed forces. While eligible to vote, the court found that RE did not meet the residency requirement even considering the active duty exception. The law is the law, and what kind of mayor he would make is irrelevant to the question at hand. If he really truly wanted to be mayor from the get go, he could have quit the CoS job (or not taken it in the first place) and established his residency in Chicago to avoid this issue altogether. But he didn't, and now he has to live with the consequences.

Posted by: Illini | January 25, 2011 9:05 AM | Report abuse

Rahm Emanuel was asked to serve his country in Washington. Must he become a resident of Washington, DC? US military personnel don't become residents of Afghanistan just because they are serving their country there. If Rahm Emanuel is not allowed maintain his residency then our servicemen will not be allowed the rights that are due them.

Posted by: hebintn | January 25, 2011 9:05 AM | Report abuse

What an absolute crock. He votes there and pays taxes there so he is a resident. He was in Washington serving his country. Does that mean a serviceperson who has served tours of duty elsewhere cannot come home and run for office. Of course not. This country has become so mean spirited about politics. I don't understand it. Look at the person not the political party they belong to. I think Rahm would be a terrific mayor. He's intelligent, which is not the case of at least 50% of this country's residents.

Posted by: eprobst | January 25, 2011 8:55 AM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company