January 9th, 2009
02:04 PM ET
10 years ago

Ill. high court: No signature needed on Burris appointment

(CNN) - Illinois' highest court has ruled the secretary of state does not have sign off on the appointment of Roland Burris to fill Barack Obama's vacant U.S. Senate seat.

Click here to read the Illinois Supreme Court's opinion


Filed under: Roland Burris
soundoff (59 Responses)
  1. Sherry

    What is the point of having the law stating the Secretary of State must sign this IF it is going to be ignored? Maybe just have the Supreme Court take care of all of the business in Illinois and forget the other appointed offices to carry out the laws.

    January 9, 2009 04:11 pm at 4:11 pm |
  2. Come again!

    I think Bush should be the one impeached and imprisoned. Why isn't anyone focusing on that! Also, why isn't anyone talking about where the bailout money went.....did tax payers buy that house for Bush in Dallas??

    January 9, 2009 04:12 pm at 4:12 pm |
  3. MorningStar

    No brainer here.

    January 9, 2009 04:18 pm at 4:18 pm |
  4. Azar

    Just seat him.

    January 9, 2009 04:29 pm at 4:29 pm |
  5. Felonious Monk

    LOL, LOL, LOL.
    Wow, now this is humorous. I find it entertaining that Burris will be seated in the Senate. Correct me if I am wrong but, he was appointed by a legally elected official.
    It is good to know that the American Way is still alive and kicking.
    LOL, LOL, LOL.

    January 9, 2009 05:03 pm at 5:03 pm |
  6. Liz

    Nothing against Roland Burris, but kudos to Jesse White for sticking to his guns anyway.

    January 9, 2009 05:16 pm at 5:16 pm |
  7. Arkansas Undertaker

    Thank goodness! Now lets get this crap over with!!!

    January 9, 2009 05:23 pm at 5:23 pm |
  8. Samara Gale

    Congratulations America. Once again your judicial system proves itself to be a laughable but sick joke. Confirming the appointee of a governor with criminal charges hanging over his head is astounding. Are there no decent people with integrity and intelligence left in your judicial system?

    January 9, 2009 06:13 pm at 6:13 pm |
  9. Gerard

    For those that don't understand the US: we have this pesky little thing we like to call the constitution, which gives ALL of us the presumption of innocence. In simple terms, that means you are not guilty JUST because the government claims you are ... they have to prove it in court. Until they do, you are innocent.

    So Blago is almost surely going to go down, but it hasn't happened yet. He is still the gov. So if he signs some legislation, it becomes valid law. Same thing if he appoints someone.

    Of course his appointments will be surrounded by a cloud of suspicion, but as the sitting gov, he does have the power to appoint. His appointments ARE valid (just inherently suspect).

    January 10, 2009 06:53 am at 6:53 am |
1 2 3