This article seems to be criticizing Madigan’s response, however, her response is using terms in legalese (which the author is interpreting incorrectly) and it’s not controversial in the slightest. She is a supporter of the cause and is not at all skirting the issue, she is stating that a county within a state has no legal authority to tell other counties what to do. She is reiterating legal policies that are basic in what cases can govern others. One county’s response cannot be binding on any others (only a State court decision can be binding on counties, only a Federal Court decision can be binding on it’s district, US Supreme Court decisions are binding on all lower law). There is a process, the term “persuasive” is given weight in decisions by judges when there is no binding case on the issue. This article is slightly bothersome because it’s trying to make it sound like Madigan is avoiding the issue. When in reality, she is regurgitating the basic process of legal decisions in our country. If anything she is encouraging it; Cook County has no ability to hold precedent on anything other than Cook County. The writer of this article should have looked into the legal terminology prior to the completion of the sided piece.