Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Dryheavemorning t1_j2e51n5 wrote

>In an order filed Friday afternoon, Commonwealth Court Judge Ellen Ceisler said the seven articles filed against Krasner, which were approved by the House last month, did not sufficiently show that he’d failed to perform his duties with an improper or corrupt motive, which is required under the state constitution to impeach a public official.

>The practical implications of the ruling were not immediately clear...

>“It seems to me that these impeachment proceedings are based on disagreements with public policy and an elected officials’ discretion,” she said. “And I think that this proceeding could set terrible precedent in the future.”

46

Trafficsigntruther t1_j2eukm5 wrote

But also:

> In the order Friday, the court rejected the latter two arguments from Krasner, saying impeachment proceedings could occur across different legislative sessions, and that the legislature could impeach the city’s district attorney.

6

oliver_babish t1_j2fivja wrote

So, basically, "you can impeach a DA, but not for weaksauce like this."

19

Paparddeli t1_j2f8ch9 wrote

Yeah, he really only won on one of three issues. It's also important to remember that this was the decision of one Democratic judge. The Pa. Supreme Court will have the final word, where there is currently a 4-2 Democratic edge, with not all the Democratic justices being fans of Krasner.

8

Krasmaniandevil t1_j2fb7ym wrote

If they side against Krasner, they open the door to the legislature impeaching justices for decisions they don't like. I don't think they're that stupid, but I've been wrong before.

18