* Press release…
Illinois House Republican Leader Jim Durkin (R-Western Springs), state Rep. Deanne Mazzochi (R-Elmhurst), and state Sen. John Curran (R-Downers Grove) today filed an amicus brief in the Circuit Court of the Eighteenth Judicial Circuit in response to the proposed consent order that will allow for the re-opening of the Sterigenics facility in Willowbrook.
“Sterigenics has lost the right to operate in our community,” said Durkin. “This brief lays out the steps taken by the General Assembly, through The Matt Haller Act, to ensure corporate polluters like Sterigenics can’t harm any more of our state’s residents.”
“The Matt Haller Act’s language was specifically crafted to allow Illinois EPA to keep Sterigenics shut down based on its prior Seal Order findings, and the Illinois Attorney General’s assumption Sterigenics can meet the narrow limited exceptions given the added new compliance standards is premature and unfounded,” said Mazzochi. “At this time neither Sterigenics nor the Illinois EPA have shown Sterigenics can or will meet The Matt Haller Act standards, and until they do, they should remain shut down.”
The brief provides the court with additional background regarding the language in, and the intent of, The Matt Haller Act to show that the legislature appropriately addressed the issue of ethylene oxide in Illinois and that any attempts to circumvent the law are misguided and a misinterpretation of the law.
The amicus brief is here. I’ve asked the governor’s and the attorney general’s people for comment.
* From the brief…
*** UPDATE *** Press release…
In light of recent developments regarding the potential re-opening of the Sterigenics facility in Willowbrook, Illinois, U.S. Senators Dick Durbin (D-IL) and Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), and U.S. Representatives Sean Casten (D-IL-06), Dan Lipinski (D-IL-03), Bill Foster (D-IL-11), and Brad Schneider (D-IL-10) today urged the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to set new, strict national standards for facilities emitting ethylene oxide (EtO) as soon as possible. The members also requested that a timeline of events, along with a status of progress, be shared publicly to reassure neighboring communities that the EPA is working to mitigate the cancer risk associated with prolonged EtO exposure. They also pushed EPA to conduct ambient air monitoring in Lake County where two EtO emitting facilities operate.
“The EPA is taking too long to move forward with an action to protect communities surrounding ethylene oxide facilities,” the members wrote in a letter to EPA Administrator Wheeler. “Even after elevated levels of EtO emissions have been found around the facilities in Willowbrook and Lake County, the EPA has been slow to respond to this public health crisis.”
*** UPDATE 2 *** Governor’s office…
The Legislators’ amicus brief reflects a fundamental misstatement of the new state law which they drafted and sponsored. The consent order not only explicitly requires the company to comply with the new law but actually includes provisions that are more stringent than the law by imposing additional conditions on Sterigenics to protect the community. Without the consent order, Sterigenics would fight to reopen even before the strongest ethylene oxide sterilization regulations in the nation take effect.
From the consent order…
This Consent Order in no way affects the responsibilities of Defendant to comply with any other federal, state or local laws or regulations, including but not limited to the Act and the Board regulations.
And, I’m told, the judge in the case and the attorney for Willowbrook and Burr Ridge acknowledged in court last week that the statute allows Sterigenics to operate if they comply with the state’s new law.
…Adding… The transcript of that proceeding is here.
*** UPDATE 3 *** AG Raoul…
When my office partnered with DuPage County State’s Attorney Bob Berlin to file a lawsuit against Sterigenics, we called on the state’s lawmaking body – the General Assembly – to pass legislation to ban or greatly restrict the use of ethylene oxide in Illinois.
The Illinois EPA issued a seal order that our office has vigorously defended, ensuring the order remained in place to prevent operations while the General Assembly enacted stricter standards for ethylene oxide facilities in Illinois. The Legislature passed, and Gov. Pritzker signed, stringent regulations requiring facilities that generate ethylene oxide emissions to reduce emissions from each exhaust point by 99.9 percent. Under the law, facilities – including Sterigenics – that comply with the new law can operate in the state of Illinois.
The law passed just this spring by Leader Durkin, Sen. Curran and Rep. Mazzochi does include the strongest regulations of ethylene oxide emissions in the nation. However, it does not ban the use of ethylene oxide in Illinois.
Nothing in the proposed consent order filed last week allows Sterigenics to reopen unless and until Sterigenics can demonstrate compliance with the law, as recently passed by the Legislature.
- Chicago Cynic - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 2:22 pm:
I don’t understand that last sentence. “…and requires a separate and independent Agency analysis that, to date, cannot or could be done, let alone published….”
Seems like in their haste they got a bit sloppy.
And this whole thing is a political play. We are toughest on Sterigenics. No, we are. Are not. Are too.
- JB13 - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 2:31 pm:
Really glad to note their deep concern the governor and attorney general may now be circumventing the law.
- Nick Name - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 2:32 pm:
So not a single Republican in the Illinois congressional delegation joined the Dems in calling on the EPA to set national standards?
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 2:35 pm:
===So not a single Republican in the Illinois congressional delegation===
There are no suburban Republicans left in the delegation.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 2:35 pm:
===I’ve asked the governor’s and the attorney general’s people for comment.===
My hope is Rich asking for comment isn’t the first either the AG’s or the governor’s office heard of the move.
The point in the exercise is… if we’re doing something, and not including everyone, at least have the courtesy of calling first.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 2:36 pm:
===isn’t the first either the AG’s or the governor’s office heard of the move===
It was.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 2:37 pm:
===There are no suburban Republicans left in the delegation.===
That’s not the map’s fault, so folks should think about what that says about the ILGOP, let alone the ILGOP on this issue.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 2:38 pm:
===It was.===
That’s fun.
Durkin and Crew want to be more like Sterigenics when approaching this?
Not as fun, but just as telling.
C’mon.
Talk to each other.
- phenom_Anon - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 2:39 pm:
=I don’t understand that last sentence. “…and requires a separate and independent Agency analysis that, to date, cannot or could be done, let alone published….”=
I could be reading it wrong, but I believe that is because the equipment hasn’t been installed, much less tested and checked, so the required report could not have been done yet.
- phenom_Anon - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 2:46 pm:
=Durkin and Crew want to be more like Sterigenics when approaching this?=
Looks to me like Durkin and crew are directly challenging the consent agreement, and the Gov’s stated position on the issue. See page 2- “Representatives from the offices of the Illinois EPA, Illinois Attorney General and the Governor refused to accept such language for the final bill.”
- Necessary - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 2:47 pm:
Illinois’s new law, and the agreement with Sterigenics will be WAY more limiting than what the Feds end up putting in place. Those who know the science understand these controls make the risk to the public nonexistent, yet they are still against them opening? These folks wood the law, voted for the law and now are against it? This is just politics and not policy or science at this point.
- Homer Simpson's Brain - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 2:50 pm:
Durkin really screwed the pooch here. If Sterigenics can show a judge it is in compliance with Durkin’s law, then Sterigenics will reopen. No amount of pleading will change this. Durkin was offered a special session; he has no one but himself to blame for rejecting the Governor’s offer.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 2:52 pm:
===Looks to me like Durkin and crew are directly challenging the consent agreement===
Durkin’s failed bill did that.
===See page 2- “Representatives from the offices of the Illinois EPA, Illinois Attorney General and the Governor refused to accept such language for the final bill.”===
So the governor signed a bad bill Durkin got passed, but we’re gonna blame the governor because Durkin couldn’t run a bill to pass and put the governor on the spot?
I thought legislators… legislate?
If the argument is…
“I can’t write a bill to force the signature of a stronger bill, I failed Willowbrook”?
Ok.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 2:55 pm:
===See page 2- “Representatives from the offices of the Illinois EPA, Illinois Attorney General and the Governor refused to accept such language for the final bill.”===
Durkin should agree to the Special Session, pass that trailer bill and force the hand of the Governor.
Why won’t he?
Oh. Durkin said he stands by his bill.
Stands by the bill, but…
“See page 2- “Representatives from the offices of the Illinois EPA, Illinois Attorney General and the Governor refused to accept such language for the final bill.”
Again, “ok”, go with that.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 3:00 pm:
===Representatives from the offices of the Illinois EPA, Illinois Attorney General and the Governor refused to accept such language for the final bill===
I’m told by the governor’s office that they didn’t want background levels included in the bill because industry tends to want that stuff so it can claim that the pollution is coming from elsewhere.
- anon2 - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 3:03 pm:
== So not a single Republican in the Illinois congressional delegation joined the Dems in calling on the EPA to set national standards? ==
Modern Republicans only advocate strict regs on polluting corporations when the pollution directly affects their districts. Otherwise they are enthusiastic advocates of deregulation.
- phenom_Anon - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 3:08 pm:
=I’m told by the governor’s office that they didn’t want background levels included in the bill because industry tends to want that stuff so it can claim that the pollution is coming from elsewhere. =
What happened to: “The administration made it clear to members of the General Assembly that he would be willing to sign any measure, up to and including a ban, on the use of ethylene oxide in the state of Illinois”?
- phenom_Anon - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 3:11 pm:
=Oh. Durkin said he stands by his bill.=
Read the brief. It looks like Durkin and crew are doing exactly that. The whole thing is based on elements of the new law that were completely ignored in the consent agreement. Elements that were also conveniently ignored in the AG’s fact sheet comparing the law to the agreement.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 3:15 pm:
===It looks like Durkin and crew are doing exactly that.===
Durkin’s failed bill? Huh.
===The whole thing is based on elements of the new law that were completely ignored in the consent agreement. Elements that were also conveniently ignored in the AG’s fact sheet comparing the law to the agreement.===
Really?
===Representatives from the offices of the Illinois EPA, Illinois Attorney General and the Governor refused to accept such language for the final bill===
Sounds like a lot of complaining about a failed bill.
You told be to “See page 2”
Is it the language of the failed bill, the language the fails legislators couldn’t pass, or the failed bill and the company is trying to comply with the failed language?
Does Durkin and Crew realize how ridiculous they sound… that are helpless…
If they feel it works, ok, go with that, I guess.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 3:17 pm:
If Durkin and Co are more worried about blame then Willowbrook…
- phenom_Anon - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 3:24 pm:
=You told be to “See page 2”=
The point there is simply that the Governor wasn’t and isn’t being honest in his stated position on the issue.
=Is it the language of the failed bill, the language the fails legislators couldn’t pass, or the failed bill and the company is trying to comply with the failed language?=
The bill sets out requirements for Sterigenics to meet to re-open. Parts of it haven’t been met, parts of it can’t be met. Durkin and crew are putting it to the court to reach the same conclusion.
Seriously, just read the brief, it’s all in there.
- Surge - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 3:26 pm:
what happens when there’s a more severe shortage of sterilized equipment?
- phenom_Anon - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 3:32 pm:
=Durkin’s failed bill?=
Per the brief- The new law says certain equipment has to be installed and certified, which hasn’t happened.
Because the facility was subject to a seal order, they also have to certify that eto is the only option, which they haven’t. The only way around that section would involve upgrades that aren’t allowed under Willowbrook zoning rules.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 3:35 pm:
===The point there is simply that the Governor wasn’t and isn’t being honest in his stated position on the issue.===
That’s the point Durkin wants made? Whew. The Vivernur spent $300K a day to *be* the “Governor”. You think for a second they’re gonna let Durkin tell folks the governor lied, after signing Durkin’s failed bill?
Again, “ok”…
===The bill sets out requirements for Sterigenics to meet to re-open. Parts of it haven’t been met, parts of it can’t be met. Durkin and crew are putting it to the court to reach the same conclusion.===
Are you saying, for Leader Durkin, “in the end”, the plants gonna open, and Durkin’s own bill, the bill he stands by, the failed bill, can’t stop that?
“Why?”
Rich…
===…because industry tends to want that stuff so it can claim that the pollution is coming from elsewhere.===
So…
Ya see why I’m all…
This phony posturing, you yourself say, won’t lead to the plant closing.
Why not be honest?
- DuPage - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 3:35 pm:
I am surprised Sterigenics didn’t quietly re-open in NW Indiana, amongst the steel mills and oil refineries. Indiana has a reputation of going easy on pollution, they go only by federal standards which are not nearly as strong as the consent decree.
- phenom_Anon - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 3:43 pm:
=Are you saying, for Leader Durkin, “in the end”, the plants gonna open, and Durkin’s own bill, the bill he stands by, the failed bill, can’t stop that?=
I’m not sure how you got that, but you may want to re-read. The law says the plant can’t reopen. That’s why Durkin and crew filed the brief, so a judge can make that ruling.
=You think for a second they’re gonna let Durkin tell folks the governor lied=
Not sure why you seem to take the Gov’s word as gospel regardless of facts. Gov said he’d sign anything, Rich just made it clear in the comment above that that wasn’t actually the Gov’s position.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 3:44 pm:
===Because the facility was subject to a seal order, they also have to certify that eto is the only option, which they haven’t. The only way around that section would involve upgrades that aren’t allowed under Willowbrook zoning rules.===
So the plant is going to open at some point…
There’s probably really good reasons i asked what I have been, and my overt frustration is Leader Durkin, now twice, has decided to go around, as opposed to being everybody in, to basically cover himself.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 3:46 pm:
You wrote…
===The bill sets out requirements for Sterigenics to meet to re-open. Parts of it haven’t been met, parts of it can’t be met. ===
Not according to the company.
Oops.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 3:48 pm:
===The bill sets out requirements for Sterigenics to meet to re-open. Parts of it haven’t been met, parts of it can’t be met. ===
If the company can reopen, and reopen, i dunno how you call the bill a success… if the outcome was closure.
You’re not helping, I’m trying to get ya to back down, but if ya wanna keep hurting…
- phenom_Anon - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 3:51 pm:
=There’s probably really good reasons i asked what I have been, and my overt frustration is Leader Durkin, now twice, has decided to go around, as opposed to being everybody in, to basically cover himself.=
Durkin passed a law with specific requirements that Sterigenics can’t comply with. The law says Sterigenics can’t re-open. This really isn’t that complicated.
=Not according to the company.=
Good thing a court gets to decide, not the company.
=If the company can reopen, and reopen, i dunno how you call the bill a success… if the outcome was closure.=
Have they?
- Louis G. Atsaves - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 3:51 pm:
Strong brief. Demands the court and parties also consider the legislative history and intent of the bill. Insinuates this isn’t being done as part of the proposed consent order. Multiple surrounding municipalities are trying to intervene in this case? Didn’t see that in the AG’s summary of the law posted last week. Now the surrounding Congressmen and our two U.S. Senators are also squawking?
I now understand where the three Springfield legislators are coming from here. The rush to settle this matter and Sterigenics’ joyful press release that jumped the gun ahead of the other players appears to be misguided.
So far I see the Attorney General, DuPage States Attorney, and Illinois Governor vs. nearly everyone else, from the three elected officials in that region representing the region in Springfield, the surrounding communities, to the suburban congressmen and to our two U.S. Senators. Let’s not forget the Waukegan region in all this.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 3:53 pm:
===Good thing a court gets to decide, not the company.===
lol, you think the company now is going to back down after all this?
Good luck with that.
Are you saying the business won’t be opened?
It’s a yes or no.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 3:55 pm:
===Have they?===
I’ll save that one for the Willowbrook residents if the company wins.
Durkin wants to wholly own a court order and subsequent reopening, ok…
- phenom_Anon - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 4:05 pm:
=It’s a yes or no.=
I don’t have a crystal bill and who knows what happens in the distant future. But if we’re making predictions, I’d say that either the court keeps the seal order in place; or they lift for some reason other than the new law (the current case has to do with the seal order under the old law), then the Stop Sterigenics group waits for the plant to briefly re-open (for legal purposes) then sues based on the new law, gets an emergency order to stop it, then the Willowbrook facility stays closed.
=Durkin wants to wholly own a court order and subsequent reopening, ok…=
You and the Gov sure seem to want the facility to re-open, if you want to own that, go for it.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 4:05 pm:
===So far I see the Attorney General, DuPage States Attorney, and Illinois Governor vs. nearly everyone else, from…===
Counselor,
And if the judge rules in favor the company and cites the law, you gonna tell folks it was a “corrupt judge and not following the law”?
Having sides where it’s not the Company versus everyone else isn’t going to help the locals or Willowbrook if this heads south with a ruling.
Then again, Durkin, legislatively could end all this with a trailer bill. Why won’t he?
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 4:08 pm:
===I don’t have a crystal bill and who knows what happens in the distant future.===
No, you just typed… and told me how foolish I was…
===Durkin passed a law with specific requirements that Sterigenics can’t comply with. The law says Sterigenics can’t re-open.===
It can’t reopen. You just told me… read… it can’t.
Now you can’t predict?
Why is that? I thought the bill stopped this?
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 4:10 pm:
===You and the Gov sure seem to want the facility to re-open, if you want to own that, go for it.===
Nah, good try.
The law and how laws work are deciding that.
Durkin can shut it down with legislation, heck, the governor stated he’d sign *any* bill sent to him.
Why won’t Durkin go that far.
(See the grab from Rich)
- phenom_Anon - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 4:10 pm:
=And if the judge rules in favor the company and cites the law, you gonna tell folks it was a “corrupt judge and not following the law”?=
Not planning on it. But again, the current case isn’t actually based on the new law. If he rules the other way, you going to say “Durkin won for the people of Willowbrook?”
=Then again, Durkin, legislatively could end all this with a trailer bill. Why won’t he?=
The brief, and Rich’s post make it clear, despite was Pritzker says, he doesn’t want a tougher bill. 60, 30, and 1.
With apologies to Meatloaf, “I’ll sign anything for Willowbrook, but I won’t sign that…”
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 4:13 pm:
===Pritzker says, he doesn’t want a tougher bill.===
You must base that on… something, lol
===60, 30, and 1.===
Are you saying Durkin can’t get 60?
He’s the minority leader in the House.
You want the governor to become a legislator.
Heck, the governor says he’d sign any bill, why not call him in it?
===“Durkin won for the people of Willowbrook?”===
I’ve always ate and owned my words, ask around.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 4:15 pm:
===With apologies to Meatloaf, “I’ll sign anything for Willowbrook, but I won’t sign that…”===
Why not call him on it?
Wonder why? I’d call him on it, why won’t Durkin run a trailer bill and end it?
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 4:17 pm:
===…I’m told, the judge in the case and the attorney for Willowbrook and Burr Ridge acknowledged in court last week that the statute allows Sterigenics to operate if they comply with the state’s new law.===
Durkin’s bill failed.
Good thing he decided to loop everyone in to try to fix it.
- phenom_Anon - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 4:21 pm:
=Wonder why? I’d call him on it, why won’t Durkin run a trailer bill and end it?=
If I have to explain it to you, that doesn’t speak highly of you. Calling his bluff requires passing the bill. Pritzker can get the bill locked in rules or assignments. Madigan has been willing to kill bills far more popular than this one. Then Pritzker just shrugs and says he would’ve signed it if they could’ve passed it.
Durkin already snuck a strong enough bill past Pritzker and the Dems, they won’t let him do it again.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 4:27 pm:
===If I have to explain it to you, that doesn’t speak highly of you. Calling his bluff requires passing the bill. Pritzker can get the bill locked in rules or assignments.===
Wow, is Leader Durkin weak.
His hands are tied?
A victim… of the system?
You’d think it would be worth fighting. Is this the excuse being told to the residents? Leader Durkin is too weak?
===Madigan has been willing to kill bills far more popular than this one.===
Desperate enough to pull the Madigan card?
It’s a partisan thing, not a health thing?
You’d think the minority leader would like that optic, fighting Madigan. But, the default is… “because Madigan”?
===Durkin already snuck a strong enough bill past Pritzke===
So now it’s fighting the Governor too?
Better have deep pockets, and worry about in his own party a primary.
So.. “because Madigan”, the fail bill is strong enough, and too scared to rest of the Governor will sign.
Not great optics.
- A guy - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 4:35 pm:
2 things you can surmise here. Using this stuff to sterilize must be a very, very lucrative business. And, it’s likely very hard to open one of these places anywhere compared to fighting for one you got open a long time ago.
- ReedDBill - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 4:37 pm:
Can someone clarify — the new law says in what Rich clipped above that as a condition of Sterigenics reopening to sterilize a product, the Agency (not the company) has to certify first that Sterigenics is has implemented technology that leads to the greatest ethylene oxide reductions currently available. How can you get more stringent or restrictive than that in a consent order, apart from an outright ban on all ethylene oxide sterilization, which the consent order doesn’t do either?
- JJJJJJJJJJJ - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 4:40 pm:
So, which part of this is inaccurate?
Durkin wrote a bill that had very strict requirements for Sterigenics to reopen. The requirements were so strict he thought he had effectively shut Sterigenics down. But, Sterigenics indicated it would follow the requirements. The Gov, AG, and Dupage SA get a consent order detailing how Sterigenics can reopen. Durkin blames the ordeal on that consent order rather than on his bill?
What am I missing here? How is this not Durkin’s fault?
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 4:48 pm:
===Durkin wrote a bill that had very strict requirements for Sterigenics to reopen. The requirements were so strict he thought he had effectively shut Sterigenics down. But, Sterigenics indicated it would follow the requirements. The Gov, AG, and Dupage SA get a consent order detailing how Sterigenics can reopen. Durkin blames the ordeal on that consent order rather than on his bill?===
… then deciding to go after someone who without breaking a sweat spent $300K a day, and thinking that person is going to eat this…and going out alone… twice… twice alone to point fingers?
For the love of Pete…
Talk. To. Each. Other.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 4:53 pm:
To this update;
===Nothing in the proposed consent order filed last week allows Sterigenics to reopen unless and until Sterigenics can demonstrate compliance with the law, as recently passed by the Legislature.===
Following the bill, the company is planning to reopen.
Again, everyone, talk to each other.
You can’t game this out with a decisive victory… unless that bill is run.
Rich explained why that bill is as it is.
The rest of that is up to Leader Durkin… or everyone can try to figure out the outs… together… or how this rolls in the end… together.
- JJJJJJJJJJJ - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 5:01 pm:
AG Raoul’s statement seems pretty clear…..
The real issue here seems to be that Durkin et al. built up the expectation that Sterigenics would never reopen. But, that was based on a hunch rather the law itself.
Now that Sterigenics seems willing to comply and residents of the area have to grapple with a future where it’s open again, Durkin et al. have to scramble to explain themselves. So they pin it on the gov.
For political purposes that’s not the dumbest idea. How many riled up residents are going to go through and read the bill and the consent order instead of just trusting their legislators?
But for the purposes of fixing the issue it’s completely useless.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 5:08 pm:
J∞ is right.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 5:11 pm:
===Durkin et al. have to scramble to explain themselves. So they pin it on the gov.
For political purposes that’s not the dumbest idea.===
Governors own. That’s how it’s always been.
Will the Governor lay waste to the legislators and decide to go full assault on Durkin?
They need to talk… to each other.
- Huh? - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 6:11 pm:
“what happens when there’s a more severe shortage of sterilized equipment?”
Routine medical procedures will be canceled, along with potentially life saving surgeries.
- James - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 7:15 pm:
Rep. Durkin could have proposed banning manufacture of a dangerous but necessary substance, being manufactured in an area in which many prosperous constituents live. I can’t imagine the Democrats not supporting a ban and helping to override a Rauner veto if it had occurred. But it’s bad for the GOP brand to chase businesses from Illinois, so instead, they left the industry an opening and had to have foreseen the possibility of compliance. Maybe it’s not so easy for such an industry to relocate and open a new plant these days, anywhere in the US.
- Norseman - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 9:06 pm:
=== Demands the court and parties also consider the legislative history and intent of the bill. ===
Courts only go to intent if there is some ambiguity in the language of the law. If the law says turn right, the court will not accept a claim of intent was to turn left. Legislative History 101. If the intent was to keep the company closed, then the bill should have been written to that effect.
JB gave Durkin an out with a special session, but Durkin doesn’t want to admit his error.
- Hamlet's Ghost - Tuesday, Jul 23, 19 @ 9:16 pm:
Durkin’s true intent could have been to close Sterigenics without banning EtO elsewhere in IL because, well, there aren’t good alternatives to EtO for the medical supply chain.
In other words let the poor people in some other district deal with the issue.
- Shamrockery - Wednesday, Jul 24, 19 @ 7:44 am:
Rich, thanks for posting the transcript. Seeing the trial judge’s statements about how the court views the statute really helps to explain why the AG did what they did. Thanks for the context (banned punctuation)