Updated: September 24, 2012 6:25AM
Two Illinois Supreme Court justices — who agreed that Rahm Emanuel should be able to run for mayor — nevertheless had a message for the five justices in the majority: pipe down.
Anne Burke and Charles Freeman took issue with the language used in the majority opinion criticizing an appellate court ruling that temporarily knocked Emanuel off the ballot.
“Contrary to the majority’s assertions, the only thing that is well-established in this case is the confusion that has existed on this subject,” Burke and Freeman wrote. “The tone taken by the majority today is unfortunate. Spirited debate plays an essential role in legal discourse. But the majority opinion here and the appellate dissent cross the line.”
That dissent was written by Judge Bertina Lampkin, who said the appellate courts Monday ruling was “not based on established law but, rather, on the whims of two judges.’’
Burke and Freeman took the extraordinary step of citing in their legal opinion editorials in the Chicago Sun-Times and the Chicago Tribune published in the last few days as evidence that discourse was getting out of hand. Overly strong language in the appellate court’s dissent fueled the strongly worded editorials, they claimed.