Pennsylvania Constitution Must Reading For Pennsylvania Patriots — Delaware County’s Bill Denison has been holding on-line classes regarding the Pennsylvania Constitution and generally promoting the reading of it.
To our embarrassment, reading it was not something we’ve ever done and so a few weeks ago we did.
You’d be surprised at what you find.
Consider Article II concerning the legislature which includes reapportionment:
d) Any aggrieved person may file an appeal from the final plan directly to the Supreme Court within 30 days after the filing thereof. If the appellant establishes that the final plan is contrary to law, the Supreme Court shall issue an order remanding the plan to the commission and directing the commission to reapportion the Commonwealth in a manner not inconsistent with such order.
(e) When the Supreme Court has finally decided an appeal or when the last day for filing an appeal has passed with no appeal taken, the reapportionment plan shall have the force of law and the districts therein provided shall be used thereafter in elections to the General Assembly until the next reapportionment as required under this section 17.
When the state Supreme Court ordered that Pennsylvania’s congressional districts be withdrawn in 2018, was that more or less than 30 days after they were approved on Dec. 22, 2011?
Based on the Pennsylvania Constitution, the state legislature should have immediately begun impeachment proceedings for every judge who vote aye for the new districts.
If the citizenry was aware of the what the law was they would have supported the action.
Did you know that there is a specific section regarding absentee voting?
§ 14. Absentee voting.
(a) The Legislature shall, by general law, provide a manner
in which, and the time and place at which, qualified electors
who may, on the occurrence of any election, be absent from the
municipality of their residence, because their duties,
occupation or business require them to be elsewhere or who, on
the occurrence of any election, are unable to attend at their
proper polling places because of illness or physical disability
or who will not attend a polling place because of the observance
of a religious holiday or who cannot vote because of election
day duties, in the case of a county employee, may vote, and for
the return and canvass of their votes in the election district
in which they respectively reside.
(b) For purposes of this section, "municipality" means a
city, borough, incorporated town, township or any similar
general purpose unit of government which may be created by the
General Assembly.
(Nov. 5, 1957, P.L.1019, J.R.1; May 16, 1967, P.L.1048, J.R.5;
Nov. 5, 1985, P.L.555, J.R.1; Nov. 4, 1997, P.L.636, J.R.3)
1967 Amendment. Joint Resolution No.5 renumbered former
section 14 to present section 11 and amended and renumbered
former section 19 to present section 14.
1957 Amendment. Joint Resolution No.1 added present section
14 (formerly section 19).
One with knowledge of the words in Constitution would have demanded that the addition of the category of “mail -in elector” would have required amending the Constitution rather than merely changing the Election Code as per Act 77 of 2019.
Where you aware that witnesses in contested elections may not withhold testimony upon the ground that it may criminate himself or subject him to public infamy.
The Constitution is not fun reading but even skimming it and being aware of the table of contents is a significant upgrade in understanding.
The citizenry of this state better start learning how to be citizens.
Thanks Bill Denison for the inspiration.
The problem is the judiciary doesn’t comply with the Constitution which happens to be a violation of their Official Oath to uphold the Constitution. For example, Article V of the PA Constitution addresses the Judiciary. Article V Section 9 guarantees the right to appeal to PA Superior Court, but the Court often abuses quash to deny the right to timely and proper appeals. Article V section 10(c) prohibits the judiciary from “abridging rights of litigants”, but the judiciary often abridges rights without legal justification. Per 210 PA Code 63.1 Introduction: “The Internal Operating Procedures are intended to implement Article V of the Constitution of Pennsylvania, statutory provisions, the Pennsylvania Rules of Appellate Procedure and the customs and traditions of this Court. No substantive or procedural rights are created, nor are any such rights diminished.”
The judiciary not only diminished my rights, in violation of the the Constitution and there own Rules, but also overrode the General Assembly’s finding and declaration per legislated law 42 PA 4902:
(1) It is of paramount importance to the citizens of this Commonwealth that all individuals who seek lawful redress of their grievances have equal access to our system of justice.
Further, Article V 17(b) requires the judiciary to comply with the Judicial Canons including Canon 2.6 Right to be Heard, yet many including myself were/are denied hearings or meaningful opportunity to be heard. The last stop for a dispute is the courts, yet most of the judiciary does NOT Rule by Law, and there are rarely consequences since legislatures will not legislate reform for an independent, impartial, and non-conflictual JCB for effective discipline. The legislatures are not working on behalf of their constituents, the public or “we the people”.
Federalist 78: Hamilton warned “liberty can have nothing to fear from the judiciary alone, liberty would have every thing to fear if the judiciary were to unite with the other branches of government.” “Reflexive deference to the government irrespective of constitutional limits is judicial abdication of the duty to guard the Constitution.” The PA Judiciary is undeniably at “war” with the Constitution.