* Background is here. From One Illinois…
The governor is suing the state attorney general and One Illinois to withhold emails on government appointments from the public.
Although he lost his re-election bid Nov. 6, Gov. Bruce Rauner filed suit a week later to fight a binding opinion issued by Attorney General Lisa Madigan’s office that 1,783 emails should be released to One Illinois in a Freedom of Information Act case.
The move was unexpected — at least by One Illinois — in that Rauner could have simply ignored the binding opinion issued by the attorney general’s public access counselor and forced One Illinois to file suit to compel enforcement. Instead, he took the initiative in filing — and in spending government money and resources to keep the emails from the public.
According to legal experts, suits against binding opinions in FOIA cases are likely losers, as the public access counselor has already examined and ruled on the issues. Madigan’s office will handle the litigation and press for release of the emails.
If the suit’s not decided by the time Gov.-elect J.B. Pritzker is inaugurated Jan. 14, control of it would pass to his administration and he could simply move to release the emails. The Rauner administration would violate several laws if it tried to destroy the emails before he left office. Professor Emeritus Kent Redfield of the University of Illinois at Springfield speculated that Rauner could seek a restraining order that would extend beyond his term in office, but such rulings are rarely granted in these cases.
*** UPDATE *** From the governor’s office…
We’re not suing the AG, we can’t just ignore the opinion.
We’re appealing a binding decision made by the Public Access Counselor.
- Retired Educator - Thursday, Nov 29, 18 @ 9:41 am:
Governor Rauner is giving the impression that something needs to be hidden. He sent up a red flag, and the fireworks will follow. So much for transparency.
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Nov 29, 18 @ 9:41 am:
Wonder “who” might have the biggest voices in these emails and what they say, and what they say about those sending and receiving these emails.
They may tarnish the brand? Maybe? Right? Exactly right?
- Montrose - Thursday, Nov 29, 18 @ 9:52 am:
Rauner is going out in a blaze of glory.
- El Conquistador - Thursday, Nov 29, 18 @ 9:56 am:
This and the late AFSCME impasse appeal reveal Rauner’s character, or lack thereof. What a shallow bitter man. Money does not buy happiness.
- Skeptic - Thursday, Nov 29, 18 @ 9:56 am:
“emails on government appointments” Yeah, trying to block that doesn’t look pretty.
- Louis G Atsaves - Thursday, Nov 29, 18 @ 9:59 am:
Copy of the complaint? Something in writing from the governors office explaining their position? Any efforts to obtain those emails from the Senate or the Committee responsible for vetting candidates? Or are we going to simply rely on a press release from the aggrieved party as the absolute gospel truth?
- Generic Drone - Thursday, Nov 29, 18 @ 10:10 am:
Wonder if these might shine the light on those back porch meetings.
- Flynn's Mom - Thursday, Nov 29, 18 @ 10:14 am:
I wonder what’s hidden in the pockets of his Carhartt?
- Fixer - Thursday, Nov 29, 18 @ 10:15 am:
Anyone have odds on when a computer malfunction happens and those records can’t be recovered by DoIT?
- Benniefly2 - Thursday, Nov 29, 18 @ 10:15 am:
Those that have not yet learned the lesson from the past examples of the ‘Streisand Effect’ are bound and determined to repeat them, it seems.
- King Bruce - Thursday, Nov 29, 18 @ 10:16 am:
“Will no one rid me of this meddlesome AG?”
- Anonymous - Thursday, Nov 29, 18 @ 10:19 am:
Three governors went to jail *after* their terms of office, right?
- Reserved - Thursday, Nov 29, 18 @ 10:22 am:
I wouldn’t be too surprised if Pritzker keeps the lawsuit open. The binding opinion is more procedural than about the content of the emails. Pritzker’s team could care less about the content of the emails, but the precedent of reviewing almost 2,000 emails not being unduly burdensome will take away a tool they can use in dealing with FOIA requests. The lawsuit protects the interests of the Governor’s Office more than Rauner himself.
- RNUG - Thursday, Nov 29, 18 @ 10:22 am:
== Anyone have odds on when a computer malfunction happens and those records can’t be recovered by DoIT? ==
In the past, even years old “lost” emails were recovered by ISP.
- JS Mill - Thursday, Nov 29, 18 @ 10:25 am:
Rauner is proving that he knows corruption as our most corrupt governor ever.
- Nick Name - Thursday, Nov 29, 18 @ 10:39 am:
Having been term-limited out of office by the will of the people, he will burn down as much as he can in what little time is left to him.
- Henry Francis - Thursday, Nov 29, 18 @ 10:51 am:
The Guv obviously can be very actively involved in matters when he chooses to be. Interesting to compare what matters he is active in, and which matters he claims victimhood.
I mentioned last week how much dirty laundry will be aired once there is an administration that no longer has a vested interest in keeping it hidden. The Rauner Administration has been the worst when it comes to obstructing FOIA that I can remember.
- wordslinger - Thursday, Nov 29, 18 @ 11:04 am:
The background link provided is interesting. I’d encourage everyone to read what it is One Illinois thinks they’re on to.
By my way of thinking, since they’ve identified 1,783 specific emails, they already know what’s in them. Seems to me that would have required some help from an insider, former or current.
In their four years, the Rauners burned a lot of people who were with them.
- Anonymous - Thursday, Nov 29, 18 @ 11:04 am:
Is Rauner suing in his personal or official capacity? The story doesn’t say clearly, though it says “the governor” filed. Either option is tricky, but knowing which might clarify his thinking.
- Fixer - Thursday, Nov 29, 18 @ 11:19 am:
RNUG, I have every faith in ISP being able to do so. DoIT, though…
- The Dude Abides - Thursday, Nov 29, 18 @ 11:23 am:
The Governor who once campaigned on transparency is going to a lot of trouble to hide his emails.
- Name Withheld - Thursday, Nov 29, 18 @ 11:25 am:
==We’re appealing a binding decision made by the Public Access Counselor.==
If the Governor had ready the binding opinion in question (18-013) - he would have seen that the signature on the opinion is the Attorney General’s signature - not the Public Access Counselor. The PAC *can’t* make binding opinions - only the AG. So either he’s unaware of who can actually make binding opinions, or he’s perhaps incapable of relaying factual information regarding anyone with the name of Madigan.
- Name Withheld - Thursday, Nov 29, 18 @ 11:26 am:
“If the Governor had read” - geez, can’t cast aspersions on reading when someone can’t type.
- Anon221 - Thursday, Nov 29, 18 @ 11:29 am:
Docket detail for case 2018-MR-000857 can be found on the Seventh Circuit’s website. Use Nov 13, 2018 as the search paramenters, and Misc. Remedy as the case type.
http://records.sangamoncountycircuitclerk.org/sccc/CasesFiledByDate.sc
- JS Mill - Thursday, Nov 29, 18 @ 2:15 pm:
=Any efforts to obtain those emails from the Senate or the Committee responsible for vetting candidates? =
LOL, Louis. They sent the request to the governor. What is he hiding? You can try the deflection game but literally no one is buying that weak malarkey.
Your guy is a proven liar, and this is important, he has called everyone of his adversaries corrupt or a crook or worse. And here he is trying to keep the lid on something even though he pledged to be transparent.