HARRISBURG — The Pennsylvania Supreme Court last week blocked the state’s four legislative caucuses from joining a lawsuit filed by Gov. Tom Wolf regarding a package of five constitutional amendments.
Mr. Wolf and Acting Secretary of State Leigh Chapman filed a lawsuit last month that asked the state Supreme Court to use its rarely used and extraordinary “King’s Bench” power to skip the rest of the appellate court process and rule swiftly to decide issues of public importance.
Senate and House GOP leaders last month quickly criticized the legal filing, calling it “meritless” and that it “undermines the ability of the people of Pennsylvania to have a say in how they are governed.” Each legislative caucus later filed applications to join the suit, but were rejected without explanation.
Instead, each caucus was encouraged to submit an amicus brief, describing their position. Their deadline to submit was Aug. 24. Each caucus filed briefs on the issue.
The Supreme Court is under pressure to make a ruling in the case soon, if it decides to rule in the case. The Department of State will begin its second round of advertising the proposed constitutional amendments in every county’s newspaper, beginning Sept. 1.
Attorneys representing Senate Republicans, argued, in part, in their amicus brief submitted Aug. 23 that the court can’t rule on a proposed amendment that is still early in the legislative process.
“[Mr. Wolf] is complaining only of what might happen to his power as Governor if the proposed amendments were enacted,” Senate Republicans wrote in their amicus brief.
Senate Republicans also argued that Mr. Wolf and Ms. Chapman’s argument that all of the amendments needed to be voted on separately by the Legislature is incorrect. The attorneys for the Senate GOP noted several instances where legislative resolutions included more than one amendment proposal, including ones from 1981 or as recently as 2021.
In Mr. Wolf’s 56-page filing from last month, he argued that the proposed amendment to declare there is no right to an abortion in the state would violate the state’s constitutional right to privacy. He also argued that the way these amendments were advanced — five constitutional amendments that were all placed into the same legislative resolution — is unconstitutional, because there was no opportunity for them to be voted on separately by legislators.
GOP leaders in a committee amended Senate Bill 106 after 11 p.m. July 7 to include two additional constitutional amendments: one that would declare Pennsylvanians do not have any rights “relating to an abortion” and another that would require voters to provide a government ID to cast a ballot.
The amendment would not outright ban abortions in Pennsylvania. Abortions will remain accessible to people in Pennsylvania for up to 24 weeks of a pregnancy, per the state’s Abortion Control Act.
In total, the omnibus resolution would send five constitutional amendment proposals to the voters as soon as May 2023. The amendment must pass the Legislature again in the next legislative session before reaching the voters. The other proposed amendments include:
• Require gubernatorial candidates to choose their own running mate for lieutenant governor, instead of running separately, as they do now
• Require the state auditor general to audit elections
• Require legislative approval when a governor seeks regulatory changes
Lawmakers in Harrisburg approved these amendments on their final day in session on July 8, just before they recessed for the summer and finalized the state’s $45.2 billion budget.
The GOP-controlled Legislature has turned to the constitutional amendment process over the past two years to achieve some of their most-wished policies by circumventing a veto from Mr. Wolf. The Democratic governor has vetoed 61 bills since he took office in 2015. Three of these bills would have restricted abortions in the state, his office said.
States regained discretion over abortion laws as a result of the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization in June that overturned the constitutional right to an abortion.
Mr. Wolf petitioned the state’s highest court last month, asking it to use its extraordinary and rarely used “King’s Bench” power to skip litigating the case in the state’s lower courts and expedite review of the case.
While there are usually dozens of applications to the Supreme Court each year that ask them to use its “King’s Bench” power, very few are ever granted.
The League of Women Voters recently tried — just like the legislative caucuses — to join the case, in support of Mr. Wolf’s argument. Several other organizations hope to offer briefs in the case, such as the Pro-Life Union of Greater Philadelphia, the Pennsylvania Family Institute, the Pennsylvania AFL-CIO and several other labor unions.
Depending on whether the Supreme Court decides to take up the case, Pennsylvania residents can expect to see a second notification of the potential amendments in their county’s newspaper starting Sept. 1, and a third notification in October.
Gillian McGoldrick: gmcgoldrick@post-gazette.com; Twitter: @gill_mcgoldrick
Correction: An earlier version of this story incorrectly stated the status of the Senate Democrats’ and House Republicans’ amicus briefs. Both caucuses submitted briefs by the court-appointed Aug. 24 deadline.
First Published: August 26, 2022, 10:00 a.m.
Updated: August 26, 2022, 2:06 p.m.
