Judges are sworn to uphold the Constitution and protect our constitutional form of government. But what happens when judicial self-interest collides with the Constitution? Pennsylvania may be on the precipice of a constitutional crisis.
In 1989, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court upheld Pennsylvania’s constitution, which prohibits a judge to remain in office after the age of 70. Since then, numerous judges have retired at 70. But recently, a number of jurists filed lawsuits challenging the restriction. Then, the chief justice, Ronald D. Castille, who coincidentally turns 70 next year, announced that he would seek retention for another 10-year term on the high court, even though next year would be his last if the age restriction remains in place. Next, the eyebrows of many attorneys were raised when the Supreme Court reached down, bypassing the lower court, and agreed to hear and expedite one of those cases. Is there anyone who actually believes that despite the clear precedent, all these judges suddenly woke up one morning and, independently of each other, decided to sue?
This content has been archived.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]
