Maybe it was one of those bodies Obama’s been throwing off the bus for the last two years…

I have speed-read the 42 pages of the appellate decision, which is linked in the ChiTrib article linked by Neo. It appears to hinge on whether “residing” in a district is the same as having a “residence” in said district, and on whether or not one has an intent to return when one leaves one’s residence and resides elsewhere, even for a long time.
Webster is turned to as a legal resource.
The pro-Rahm minority does use use some mildly pejorative words about the majority and its decision. I wonder if that is a Leftist tell.

As an aside:
Are “reasoners” reasonable? Does a “reasoned” discussion ipso facto yield a “reasonable” result?
Clearly we need more lawyers.

“In interpreting a statute, a court should consider, in addition to the statutory language, the reason for the law, the problems to be remedied, and the objects and purposes sought by the law.” People v. Donoho, 204 Ill. 2d 159, 171-72, 788 N.E.2d 707 (2003).

Given how ∅bama used the courts to get Alice Palmer off the ballot in his first campaign for the state legislature, I find this rather amusing.

An ∅bama minion screwed the same way ∅bama screwed someone. Poetic justice of sorts. I’m loving it- an ad jingle from McDonalds, a Chicago area-based corporation.