Pennsylvania Supreme Court Justice David N. Wecht.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has blocked the General Assembly's bid to force Gov. Tom Wolf to end the COVID-19-related state of emergency he declared earlier this year, finding their efforts do not pass constitutional muster.

In a 4-3 decision Wednesday, the justices ruled in Wolf v. Scarnati that a resolution the Legislature passed in June seeking to compel Wolf to end the emergency cannot be enforced without being submitted to the governor to be signed or vetoed.

Although the legislators argued a state law allowed them to end gubernatorial emergency proclamations "at any time" by adopting a concurrent resolution, a majority of the Supreme Court, led by Justice David Wecht, determined that reading of the law would be unconstitutional and would go against its plain meaning, since it clearly ceded some emergency powers to the governor.

"Current members of the General Assembly may regret that decision, but they cannot use an unconstitutional means to give that regret legal effect," Wecht said. "The General Assembly must adhere to the constitutional requirement of presentment even when attempting to overturn the governor's delegated putative authority to suspend laws."

Justices Debra Todd, Christine Donohue and Max Baer joined Wecht. Justice Kevin Dougherty filed a concurring and dissenting opinion, while Chief Justice Thomas Saylor filed a dissenting opinion that Justice Sallie Mundy joined.

The decision in the case, which pits a Democratic governor against a Republican-controlled legislative body, broke down largely along party lines. The majority, however, said multiple times that it was not wading into the merits of whether Wolf's emergency declaration was good policy, but rather focusing its decision narrowly on the language of the law.

"A legislative veto in the context of a statute delegating emergency powers might be a good idea. It might be a bad idea. But it is not a constitutional idea under our current charter," Wecht said.

The dispute is the latest challenge Wolf has faced over the emergency declarations he enacted in early March, which helped lay the foundation for statewide shutdowns the governor enacted as the COVID-19 pandemic unfolded. The leading challenge to Wolf's authority was also decided by the Supreme Court in its King's Bench jurisdiction. In that case, Friends of Danny DeVito v. Wolf, which a group of business leaders filed in late March, the justices ultimately denied the request to strike down Wolf's shutdown order.

The latest dispute can be traced back to a resolution the Legislature adopted June 9 compelling Wolf to end his emergency order. Wolf, however, did not act on the resolution, arguing the Legislature cannot simply compel him to cancel the order.

Senate President Pro Tempore Joe Scarnati, R-Jefferson; Majority Leader Jake Corman, R-Centre; and the Senate Republican Caucus then sued in the Commonwealth Court, contending that state statute 35 Pa.C.S. Section 7301(c) allows the General Assembly to end state of emergency proclamations "at any time" by adopting a concurrent resolution doing so.

According to the complaint, filed June 10 by Kleinbard's Matthew Haverstick, Wolf's refusal to follow the mandates of the concurrent resolution improperly steps on the Legislature's powers.

Wolf, however, countered those efforts by filing an emergency petition to the Supreme Court, telling the justices the Senate's efforts to unilaterally end the emergency proclamation violates the presentment clause of the state's constitution.

In deciding the case, Wecht noted that the circumstances did not meet any exceptions to the presentment requirements outlined in the state constitution, and further said the majority's reading of 7301(c) gave full effect to the law. That section holds both that the Legislature can end an emergency declaration "at any time" and that a governor's emergency declaration continues until the governor decides to terminate it.

"By reading the presentment requirement into Section 7301(c), we afford meaning to all of the provisions of the statute," Wecht said. "If the governor does not agree with the General Assembly that the emergency has ended, the governor can exercise a veto, a veto that, with any other legislation, can be overridden by a two-thirds vote of both houses of the General Assembly."

A spokeswoman for the governor's office said in a statement, "The administration is pleased with the Supreme Court's decision keeping in place the disaster proclamation to assist in the state's response to the pandemic and to provide protections for businesses, workers, and residents."

Haverstick, in an email, said, "I congratulate the governor on his coronation."