Changing the wording of the ballot question on the mandatory judicial retirement age in Pennsylvania would create a logistical quandary that would only further the “cycle of uncertainty” plaguing the constitutional amendment in recent months, the secretary of state argued Wednesday in an answer and new matter filed with the state Supreme Court.
The petitioners seeking to update the question’s language—former Chief Justices Ronald D. Castille and Stephen Zappala Sr. and attorney Richard Sprague—could have pursued relief at several earlier points, but instead waited until they were almost certain to miss the first round of advertising required to put the question before voters, the answer said. The delay has put the Department of State up against deadlines for print advertisements, absentee ballots and county election notices, and the claims are therefore barred by the doctrine of laches, Secretary of State Pedro A. Cortés argued in the filing.
This content has been archived.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
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
