Pennsylvania court punts on constitution changes

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court this week rejected Governor Tom Wolf's (D) request to weigh the legality of proposed constitutional amendments, including one that would allow the legislature to reject proposed regulations with a simple majority vote.

While amendments involving abortion rights and election administration have garnered more attention, environmentalists have warned that the amendment to curtail the governor's regulatory powers could stymie efforts to control pollution from fossil fuel companies.

The Republican-led legislature advanced five constitutional amendments in July, kicking off a process that could send the proposals to voters as early as May. Wolf promptly asked the Supreme Court to get involved, arguing that the legislature passing one package "without allowing each proposed amendment to be voted upon separately" by lawmakers was unconstitutional.

Wolf had asked the judges to invoke "king's bench power," which allows the state's highest court to consider cases of public importance without them having to go through lower courts first. The Supreme Court, in a 12 September decision, did not definitively weigh in against Wolf's arguments but rejected his attempt to streamline legal proceedings.

Wolf can "seek similar relief" by filing with the Commonwealth Court, the court ruled. Any ruling from that lower body could then be appealed to the Supreme Court.

The governor's office said it is reviewing the ruling before taking further action.

Earlier this year, Republicans failed to override Wolf's veto on a bill disapproving of a regulation to join the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) cap-and-trade program — but they would have had enough votes to prevent the rule's implementation if this amendment was in force.

"The greatest impact of this change would be to prevent environmental regulations such as the RGGI rule," said the League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania, which unsuccessfully attempted to intervene in the case.

Constitutional amendments must pass a simple majority vote in the state House and Senate over two successive legislative sessions before heading to voters as a ballot referendum. Pennsylvanians would then vote on each proposed amendment separately.

Crucially, the governor has no role in the process. Republicans have increasingly turned toward the unconventional process in recent years, and two amendments to restrict the governor's emergency powers were approved by voters last year.

Legislators could approve the proposed amendments for the second time next year and have Pennsylvanians vote on them as early as May, barring further intervention from courts.

Pennsylvania will have a new governor by then: either state senator Doug Mastriano (R), a staunch opponent of RGGI and other environmental regulations, or attorney general Josh Shapiro (D), who supports more rules around drilling and hydraulic fracturing.

By Cole Martin