Tea Partier’s attorney, judge argue over need for congressman to appear in court

The lawyer for a Tea Party Republican engaged in a child-support dispute bickered with a Chicago-area judge on why the congressman had to appear in court.

During a preliminary ruling on a case between Rep. Joe Walsh (R-Ill.) and his ex-wife over whether Walsh appears to have not paid more than $100,000 in child-support payments, Cook County Circuit Judge Raul Vega questioned why Walsh had not appeared in court for the ruling. In response, Walsh’s attorney, Janet Boyle, asked “for what purpose” the congressman had to be in court. 

“Mr. Walsh is a U.S. congressman,” Boyle said, according to the Chicago Sun-Times.

Vega reportedly gave Boyle a confused look and said, “Well, he’s no different than anyone else.”

According to CBSChicago.com, Vega said he planned on issuing a "rule to show cause" requiring Walsh to prove that he does not owe money.

The Sun-Times reported that Boyle said Walsh probably would not be required to come to the next hearing.

Walsh, the freshman Tea Partier who’s gained national attention for his strong criticism of President Obama, was taken to court by his former wife over an alleged $117,000 Walsh owes his wife in child support. Walsh’s ex-wife filed court documents against Walsh in December.

Walsh’s former attorney, R. Steven Polacheck, previously said that Walsh’s ex-wife’s claim was “unfounded.”

—This story was updated at 3:30 p.m.