so my point is is there even an adequately remedy in state court for this and so when the property appeal comes you know we had over one hundred sixty eight appeals in twenty six you know it's a township extraordinary number and the reasoning behind that decision exempting that under the tax injunction act is because the court would end up increasing the revenue of the state so this is a big chunk of federal  that any point of can come in this court and challenge a credit of course you can pay some marital status sex gender right and so our point is why is this credit any different i mean basically it's a plot number because we have remedies that well interrupt the  political or political methods but ultimately as associate justice of brandeis that if we want respect for the rule of law can we need to treat the law respectfully and when a county goes  on following state assistant law and the federal court is here and it can entertain a class action to address it what is it about the property tax appeal board limitations that can address the only supreme court said that they don't allow actual relief in these proceedings for procedural irregularities and you know i know i understand that but is that what you say we have here a procedural regularity ye thank you your honor is my name is craig i'm rather represent coles county chose from i like to respond to your your last question here what is it about two of the state court remedies why are they prohibited from addressing claims alleging procedural errors well that's precisely what they argued and i thought well but when you look at the cases a whole it has no relevance to this case at all so i i looked at the authority that the houlihan case cited and the of case one of their prior decisions you read lackey decision and it makes it clear that there's a there's a very good reason why you cannot raise equitable claims for procedural errors and the reason is like all claims on equity you can't do it if there's a if you have an adequate remedy at law and that's what the lackey decision holds now there are exceptions to that ok if the tax is an authorized by law or if it's levied upon exempt property even if you do have an adequate remedy of law you can still raise your claims for equitable relief so what i'm getting at here is this is that the the determination of whether illinois procedures for appealing property tax assessments is focused on whether the state court remedy meets certain mineral minimal procedural criteria that criteria is laid out in the mcnairy decision must be plain adequately complete  court has issued i believe about a half a dozen rulings where you have up held so that the proposition that illinois procedures are adequate to complete that that he can raise really you know this is really important that they can go from the illinois supreme court to the u s supreme court and if the u s supreme court finds that the taxi that the procedure was violated the constitution that the u s supreme court can run mamta to the illinois supreme court and order the court to fix that that's not something a district court can the district court and even this court cannot remain and the case to the illinois supreme thirty s the matthews said that federal courts should act with this regard for the rightful independence of state government an act with a proper reluctance to interfere by an injunction with their it is that you know the board boards are usually appointed right so somebody along the line elect kind of commissioners maybe i don't know not look at that's it's a sidetrack but if those seem to me about class actions the lacky decision addresses that they state that the even if you end up with a multitude of suits these people can join in your action and that's in paragraph p h p of that amount of federal jurisdiction out there regarding challenging the federal challenges to local government credits they can be challenging the protection clause for race and gender all sorts of things and this one is