Senate delays Philly DA's impeachment trial amid court case
Pennsylvania’s state Senate is postponing a trial seeking to remove Philadelphia’s progressive district attorney on the heels of a court ruling that said the impeachment articles don’t meet the constitutionally required standard
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Pennsylvania's state Senate voted Wednesday to postpone a trial seeking to remove Philadelphia’s progressive district attorney on the heels of a court ruling that said the impeachment articles don't meet the constitutionally required standard.
The motion was approved unanimously in the Republican-controlled Senate and indefinitely postpones the trial of Democrat Larry Krasner, that had been scheduled to begin Jan. 18.
It was thrown into doubt by last month’s ruling by Commonwealth Court Judge Ellen Ceisler, who wrote that the impeachment articles approved by the Republican-controlled House of Representatives didn't rise to the constitutionally required standard of “misbehavior in office” to remove a public official from office.
The practical effect of Ceisler's ruling wasn't immediately clear, and Ceisler has yet to release an opinion that further explains her order.
Spearheaded by the GOP, the House voted to impeach Krasner in November. Krasner has dismissed the House Republicans’ claims as targeting at his policies and sued to halt the trial. Democrats say Republicans are abusing their legislative authority.
The House’s seven impeachment articles asserted that Krasner should be removed from office for various reasons, including complaints about his failure to prosecute some minor crimes.
Krasner, who was overwhelmingly reelected by Philadelphia voters last year, has not been charged with a crime or been sanctioned by a court.
Ceisler agreed with Krasner that the seven claims against him do not rise to the impeachable standard of “misbehavior in office.”
Ceisler also wrote that three of the claims unconstitutionally intrude upon the state Supreme Court’s exclusive authority to govern the conduct of lawyers in Pennsylvania and that two of the claims improperly challenge Krasner’s discretionary authority as the district attorney.
She did, however, reject Krasner’s claims that the Legislature lacks constitutional authority to remove local officials like him and that the impeachment proceedings against him should have died with the Nov. 30 end of the two-year legislative session.
___
Brooke Schultz is a corps member for the Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues.
Subscribe to Independent Premium to bookmark this article
Want to bookmark your favourite articles and stories to read or reference later? Start your Independent Premium subscription today.