Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Pritzker talks numbers - Talks about infected staffer - Won’t divulge staffer’s name - Staffer works down the hall - Done contact tracing - Staffer asymptomatic - Says he’s at home in Chicago - Succession is in constitution - Says 44,000 successful connections for IDES today - But IDES site went down - Defends 28 days - Defends 28 days - Says reopening businesses are putting people and their regions at risk - Defends 28 days - Prisoners go through a monitored process before release - Talks contact tracing - Son cut his hair - Reopened churches “putting hundreds of people in danger” - Defends 28 days - Seniors in under-performing nursing homes can’t easily be moved - Defends 28 days - No assurances that R Naught won’t rise this summer - “Functions of the governor’s office have really been operating well” - Says worth looking into property tax relief - Says he believes legislature should convene - Very difficult to have in-person summer school - Comments on IL Supreme Court refusal to hear case - No forms request gender identity or sexual orientation - Dr. Ezike explains why Cook got the lion’s share of remdesivir - Says he misspoke on CNN about contact tracing - Defends 28 days - Looking into action on credit scores
Next Post: *** LIVE COVERAGE ***
Posted in:
* Probably no surprise. The Supremes obviously did not want the Rauner-era cases reaching it…
New: The Illinois Supreme Court has denied Illinois AG @KwameRaoul’s request to decide whether @GovPritzker has the authority to enforce his executive orders. More to come from @semansur and @CDLB. pic.twitter.com/eeOPdCJDfW
— Jordyn Reiland (@JordynReiland) May 11, 2020
The governor commented on it today…
It’s an unusual circumstance that the Supreme Court would in fact take a case directly from circuit court and not let it go through the normal process. But I think it was the right thing to do for the AG to seek the Supreme Court’s intervention. But the Supreme Court is not saying they’re not going to rule on this ever. They’re just saying that they don’t want to skip over the appellate court, I understand.
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, May 11, 20 @ 4:02 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Pritzker talks numbers - Talks about infected staffer - Won’t divulge staffer’s name - Staffer works down the hall - Done contact tracing - Staffer asymptomatic - Says he’s at home in Chicago - Succession is in constitution - Says 44,000 successful connections for IDES today - But IDES site went down - Defends 28 days - Defends 28 days - Says reopening businesses are putting people and their regions at risk - Defends 28 days - Prisoners go through a monitored process before release - Talks contact tracing - Son cut his hair - Reopened churches “putting hundreds of people in danger” - Defends 28 days - Seniors in under-performing nursing homes can’t easily be moved - Defends 28 days - No assurances that R Naught won’t rise this summer - “Functions of the governor’s office have really been operating well” - Says worth looking into property tax relief - Says he believes legislature should convene - Very difficult to have in-person summer school - Comments on IL Supreme Court refusal to hear case - No forms request gender identity or sexual orientation - Dr. Ezike explains why Cook got the lion’s share of remdesivir - Says he misspoke on CNN about contact tracing - Defends 28 days - Looking into action on credit scores
Next Post: *** LIVE COVERAGE ***
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Once the TRO was dissolved, there wasn’t a judgment to review and the court doesn’t like to issue advisory opinions. No surprise they won’t take up the case at this stage.
Comment by SinkingShip Monday, May 11, 20 @ 4:20 pm
I anxiously await the mouthbreather reaction that “Pritzker lost!”
I’ve unfortunately encountered people on social media who think his order is unconstitutional because Bailey “won.”
Comment by Ron Burgundy Monday, May 11, 20 @ 4:21 pm
=Once the TRO was dissolved, there wasn’t a judgment to review and the court doesn’t like to issue advisory opinions.=
Which may be exactly why the TRO was dissolved. Bailey might not want a Supreme Court ruling.
Comment by JoanP Monday, May 11, 20 @ 4:33 pm
–Which may be exactly why the TRO was dissolved. Bailey might not want a Supreme Court ruling.–
You can’t milk it for all it is worth, when the IL Supreme Court quickly slaughters your cow.
Comment by Ron Burgundy Monday, May 11, 20 @ 4:56 pm
Already being touted as a victory on the Facebook down south……
Comment by Rural Stuff Monday, May 11, 20 @ 4:57 pm
From one of Bailey’s pleadings in the
Supreme Court.
“Following submission of Defendant’s notice of appeal, Plaintiff agreed to entry of an Order vacating the TRO, and on May 1, 2020, the Fifth District Appellate Court granted that request, and the TRO is dissolved, vacated and of no further force or effect.”
Comment by Bigtwich Monday, May 11, 20 @ 5:07 pm
–Already being touted as a victory on the Facebook down south……–
And those newly minted epidemiologists and appellate procedure experts would be wrong, but facts don’t seem to matter to them.
Comment by Ron Burgundy Monday, May 11, 20 @ 5:08 pm
===a victory on the Facebook down south===
President Trump also apparently approves. Bailey got the coveted POTUS Tweet.
Mission accomplished.
Comment by 47th Ward Monday, May 11, 20 @ 6:04 pm
Beg pardon, Governor:
Illinois Supreme Court Rule 302(b) expressly provides for direct appeals of cases from a trial court to the Supreme Court if a the public interest demands expeditious adjudication.
In all likelihood, the dissolution of the TRO is the reason that the AG’s request was denied.
Comment by Practical Politics Monday, May 11, 20 @ 8:17 pm