Saylor Calls Out Impeachment Drive as 'Attack' on Independent Judiciary in Pa.
One day after a dozen Republican legislators signed on to proposed legislation to impeach Democratic justices on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, Chief Justice Thomas Saylor issued a statement calling their effort "an attack upon an independent judiciary."
March 22, 2018 at 08:03 PM
5 minute read
Chief Justice Thomas G. Saylor. Photo Credit: Jeremy Drey
One day after a dozen Republican legislators signed on to proposed legislation to impeach Democratic justices on the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Chief Justice Thomas Saylor issued a statement calling their effort “an attack upon an independent judiciary.”
“As chief justice of Pennsylvania, I am very concerned by the reported filing of impeachment resolutions against justices of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania related to the court's decision about congressional redistricting,” Saylor said in a statement released Thursday afternoon. “Threats of impeachment directed against justices because of their decision in a particular case are an attack upon an independent judiciary, which is an essential component of our constitutional plan of government.”
The statement came after 11 members of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives signed on to co-sponsor four pieces of legislation by Rep. Cris Dush, R-Jefferson, proposed last month. The proposals seek the impeachment of Justices Christine Donohue, Kevin Dougherty, Debra Todd and David Wecht. A fifth piece of legislation calling for the impeachment of Justice Max Baer has not yet received any support. All five of those justices were elected as Democrats.
Dush's proposals claim the justices engaged in “misbehavior in office,” and were filed in response to the Supreme Court's decision to replace the 2011 congressional map after determining that it had been unconstitutionally gerrymandered.
The court scrapped the map in January on a 5-2 vote, with all five of the justices elected as Democrats voting in favor. The court, however, voted 4-3 in favor of replacing the map immediately. Baer was the lone Democrat who voted in favor of keeping the old map in place for now.
Throwing their support behind Dush's proposed legislation are Rep. Francis X. Ryan, R-Lebanon; Rep. Martin Causer, R-Cameron; Rep. Jim Cox, R-Berks; Rep. Seth Grove, R-York; Rep. Kristin Hill, R-York; Rep. Dawn Keefer, R-Cumberland; Rep. John McGinnis, R-Blair; Rep. Daryl Metcalfe, R-Butler; Rep. Dan Moul, R-Adams; Rep. Will Tallman, R-Adams; and Rep. Judy Ward, R-Blair.
In an emailed statement, Dush said the proposed legislation is “neither a 'threat' nor an 'attack on an independent judiciary.'”
“Even though the action by the court's majority to overturn the enacted congressional maps is causing unnecessary confusion, the court's action of drawing their own map to replace it is, I believe, a clear violation of our constitution and the separation of powers among what are supposed to be three separate but equal branches of government,” Dush said. “When the judicial branch fails to follow the constitution, the constitutional answer is impeachment. I believe this action would fulfill our constitutional responsibilities and oaths.”
Dush's legislation is expected to be referred to the state House of Representatives' State Government Committee for a hearing. Metcalfe, a conservative firebrand who signed on as a sponsor of the measure, is the co-chair of that committee.
Sending the measures to Metcalfe's committee avoids a hearing in the Judiciary Committee, which normally conducts oversight of the judicial branch. That panel is chaired by state Rep. Ron Marsico, R-Dauphin, who has taken no position on the impeachment effort and has announced he won't be seeking re-election this year.
In the impeachments of Justice Rolf Larsen in 1994, and Justice Joan Orie Melvin in 2013, proceedings began in the House Judiciary Committee.
The comments from Saylor, who was elected as a Republican, mark the first time the chief justice has spoken out about the issue. During budget hearings before lawmakers in February, Baer, the second justice in seniority, defended the court's decisions.
The debate over the court's handling of the map has been highly partisan, but many members of the legal community have been fast defenders of the court.
“I completely agree with Chief Justice Saylor's statement,” Philadelphia Bar Association Chancellor Mary Platt said in a statement Thursday. “[A]nyone has a right to disagree with a court's decision, it is improper for members of the legislative or executive branches of government to threaten or take punitive or retaliatory action against a court or individual judge for decisions made in any case.”
Bar associations across Pennsylvania have also thrown their support behind the court. Both the Philadelphia Bar Association and the Pennsylvania Bar Association issued statements supporting the court last month, and on Wednesday, Allegheny County Bar Association president Hal Coffey issued a statement saying, “The separation of powers among the three branches of government is an essential element of democracy, and our courts must be able to operate independently without political interference and impeachment threats.”
On Thursday, the Pennsylvania Bar president Sharon López issued another statement about the impeachment efforts, saying the statewide bar group joins Saylor's concerns.
“The judiciary must have the independence to interpret the law without political interference or threats of impeachment by another branch of our democracy,” she said. “Calls for impeachment are not supported by the Pennsylvania Constitution, which makes clear that public officials can be impeached 'for any misbehavior in office.' There is no misbehavior tied to the court's ruling.”
Political experts recently told the Legal it is unlikely Dush will be able to amass sufficient political support to pass any impeachment resolutions. However, they also noted that Republicans have a clear majority in the House, and, with 16 Democrats to 34 Senate Republicans, the GOP has more than the two-thirds majority needed to remove the justices.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllPhila. Jury Hits Sig Sauer With $11M Verdict Over Alleged Gun Defect
3 minute readJudge Approves $1.15M Settlement, Reduces Attorney Award in COVID-19 Tuition Reimbursement Suit
4 minute readDechert 'Spark Tank' Competition Encourages Firmwide Innovation Focus
Trending Stories
- 1'Confusion Where Previously There Was Clarity': NJ Supreme Court Should Void Referral Fee Ethics Opinion
- 2How Amy Harris Leverages Diversity to Give UMB Financial a Competitive Edge
- 3Pa. Judicial Nominee Advances While Trump Demands GOP Unity Against Biden Picks
- 4The Unraveling of Sean Combs: How Legislation from the #MeToo Movement Brought Diddy Down
- 5Publication of Information Regarding Client Matters
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250