Black Robed Bandits Take a Gamble

Columnist : L. Henry

Comments on Coy case shatter Commonwealth Court’s credibility

In a further sign that Pennsylvania isn’t going to handle its ill-advised foray into the world of casino gambling very well, a Commonwealth Court Judge has plundered the state’s constitution for the sake of seating a political appointee on the new gambling commission.

At issue is the appointment by the House Democrat Caucus of former State Representative Jeff Coy to the gambling commission. Coy was appointed while still serving in the state House, a clear violation of the state constitution. Previous to Coy’s selection, elected officials of all political stripes had honored the constitutional ban on appointing seated House and Senate members to other governmental posts out of a clear bi-partisan understanding that the practice was constitutionally forbidden.

The Coy appointment was flagged by Attorney General Jerry Pappert who filed suit in Commonwealth Court to block Coy from taking his seat on the gambling commission citing the constitutional prohibition against such appointments.

In a recent hearing on the suit, Commonwealth Court President Judge James Gardner Colins took the unusual step of interrupting Assistant Attorney General John G. Knorr’s oral argument to say: “I think you’re being disingenuous, just as I think this is blatantly political.”

So much for judicial impartiality. Usually judges at least try and project the image of being fair and impartial, but Judge Colins has arrogantly abandoned even that practice. His comments from the bench have clearly tainted the entire proceedings, killing any chance for a credible ruling from the appellate court.

To make matters worse, one of the other two judges sitting on the three-judge panel which will decide this case couldn’t even figure out which constitution was at issue. He likened the Coy appointment to President Bush’s selection of then-U.S. Senator John Ashcroft as U.S. Attorney General. Going so far as to inaccurately say Ashcroft has been appointed to head the F.B.I, Judge James J. Flaherty suggested the two appointments were similar. The problem is Attorney General Pappert is arguing a violation of the Pennsylvania constitution, not the U.S. Constitution.

One would think an appellate court judge would be better prepared and more learned on such matters. Added to Judge Flaherty’s mental confusion, Judge Collin’s inappropriate political tirade clearly shows Pappert – and by extension we the people of Pennsylvania he represents – will not get a fair hearing on this issue.

This is reason for concern on several levels. First, when the General Assembly passed the bill legalizing slot machine gambling in Pennsylvania they rejected including in the legislation giving the Office of Attorney General the powers it needed to effectively police what will surely become a large and, likely corrupt, industry. Now, one of the highest courts in the state has made a mockery out of itself by acting in a befuddled and overtly political manner on a point of constitutional law which has implications far beyond the current instance.

If the Commonwealth Court rules against Attorney General Pappert, which it clearly plans to do, then seated legislators will be free to seek out positions of personal gain anywhere in state government. Given the lavish spending and undocumented expense accounts lawmakers already shower upon themselves, this will become a major expansion of legislative perks and privileges.

If judges Colins and Flaherty had even an ounce of integrity they would recuse themselves from this case. It is quite clear they cannot, or will not, render a ruling based upon a strict interpretation of the state’s constitution. If they in fact do rule in this case, they will become the latest black robed bandits to steal from us our constitutionally protected rights.