CHICAGO (AP) - The Latest on an appeals court decision not to toss the corruption case against former U.S. House Rep. Aaron Schock[1] (all times local):

3:05 p.m.

Former U.S. Rep. Aaron Schock[2]’s attorney says he is “disappointed” that an appeals court refused to dismiss the corruption charges against the Republican from central Illinois.

George Terwilliger said in a statement that Wednesday’s decision by the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago “is not consistent” with decisions by other courts that examined similar cases.

The 7th Circuit said it doesn’t believe appellate courts have authority to address the kinds of constitutional issues at the core of Schock[3]’s appeal before a trial takes place. Schock[4] argued that prosecutors violated constitutional separation-of-powers clauses by relying too much on rules the U.S. House drew up for its members.

Schock[5]’s attorney says he is “evaluating” options about further appeals. A trial date for Schock[6] hasn’t been set.

___

1 p.m.

An appeals court has refused to toss corruption charges against former U.S. Rep. Aaron Schock[7], saying it can’t assess whether his prosecution violated constitutional separation-of-powers clauses until after he goes to trial.

The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago says in its unanimous ruling Wednesday that it doesn’t believe appellate courts have the authority to address such questions until after a verdict. No date has been set for the 36-year-old Schock[8]’s trial on 22 corruption counts.The Republican from the central Illinois city of Peoria was indicted in 2016 on charges of misusing funds. He resigned in 2015 amid scrutiny of his spending, including to redecorate his Capitol Hill office in the style of the TV show “Downton Abbey.”A Schock[9] spokesman didn’t have an immediate comment.

Copyright © 2018 The Washington Times, LLC. ...

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times welcomes your comments on Spot.im, our third-party provider. Please read our Comment Policy[10] before commenting.References^ Rep. Aaron Schock (www.washingtontimes.com)^ Rep. Aaron Schock (www.washingtontimes.com)^ Schock (www.washingtontimes.com)^ Schock (www.washingtontimes.com)^ Schock (www.washingtontimes.com)^ Schock (www.washingtontimes.com)^ Rep. Aaron Schock (www.washingtontimes.com)^ Schock (www.washingtontimes.com)^ Schock (www.washingtontimes.com)^ Comment Policy (www.washingtontimes.com)

Read more from our friends at the Washington Times