Omar Bennett
The Pennsylvania Constitution is the supreme law of the US state of Pennsylvania. The state's supreme court has the power to prescribe general rules governing practice, procedure, and the conduct of all courts, justices of the peace, and all officers serving process or enforcing orders. The constitutionality of a statute in Pennsylvania can be challenged in an appellate court by serving notice to the Attorney General of Pennsylvania. The Attorney General may be heard on the question of the constitutionality of the statute involved without formal intervention. If a federal statute is questioned, the notice must be served on the Attorney General of the United States.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Notice | A party that files a pleading, written motion, or other paper drawing into question the constitutionality of a federal or state statute must promptly notify the Attorney General of Pennsylvania. |
| Status of Attorney General | The Attorney General may be heard on the question of the constitutionality of the statute without formal intervention. If the Attorney General files a brief, the Commonwealth is deemed an intervening party. |
| No Forfeiture | A party's failure to file and serve the notice does not forfeit a constitutional claim or defense that is otherwise timely asserted. |
Explore related products
$40 $69.95
What You'll Learn
The role of the Attorney General
When challenging the constitutionality of a statute in Pennsylvania, the Attorney General plays a crucial role in ensuring the legality and fairness of the process. Firstly, under Rule 5.1 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, any party questioning the constitutionality of a federal or state statute must provide prompt written notice to the Attorney General, specifically the US Attorney General or the state Attorney General. This requirement, outlined in 28 U.S.C. §2403, ensures that the Attorney General is made aware of potential constitutional challenges.
Once the Attorney General receives this notice, they have the opportunity to exercise their statutory right to intervene. The Attorney General may choose to intervene within 60 days of receiving notice or the court certifying the challenge, whichever comes first. This intervention allows the Attorney General to present evidence and argue the question of constitutionality. Importantly, the Attorney General may be heard on the question without formal intervention, as per Rule 521. If the Attorney General files a brief, the Commonwealth is considered an intervening party in the matter.
Additionally, the Attorney General's involvement helps protect the public interest. Rule 5.1 and 28 U.S.C. §2403 require notice and certification of constitutional challenges to any federal or state statute, regardless of whether they "affect the public interest." This notice ensures the Attorney General can determine if the statute affects the public interest and take appropriate action.
Who Really Controls the Department of Justice?
You may want to see also
Court certification
In Pennsylvania, a party that files a pleading, written motion, or other paper drawing into question the constitutionality of a federal or state statute must promptly file a notice of constitutional question stating the question and identifying the paper that raises it. This notice must be given in writing to the Attorney General of Pennsylvania, who may be heard on the question of the constitutionality of the statute without formal intervention. If the Attorney General files a brief concerning the question, the Commonwealth shall be deemed an intervening party in the matter. This is to ensure that the Commonwealth can obtain a review in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania or the Supreme Court of the United States if there is an adverse decision on the constitutional question.
The specific requirements for filing a notice of constitutional question can be found in Rule 521 of the Pennsylvania Code. This rule applies when a party draws into question the constitutionality of any statute in any matter in an appellate court to which the Commonwealth or any officer thereof, acting in his or her official capacity, is not a party. The party must give immediate notice in writing to the Attorney General of Pennsylvania, together with a copy of the pleadings or other portions of the record raising the issue, and must file proof of service of such notice.
It is important to note that the failure to file and serve the notice, or the court's failure to certify, does not forfeit a constitutional claim or defense that is otherwise timely asserted. This means that even if the required notice is not given or the court does not certify the question, the constitutional challenge can still be made.
In any action, suit, or proceeding in a court of the United States where the constitutionality of an Act of Congress affecting the public interest is drawn into question, the court shall certify such fact to the Attorney General and shall permit the United States to intervene for the presentation of evidence and argument on the question of constitutionality. This ensures that the United States has the opportunity to participate in the case and present its position on the constitutional issue.
Overall, the process of challenging the constitutionality of a statute in Pennsylvania involves providing notice to the Attorney General, who may then choose to intervene in the matter. The specific requirements for filing a notice and the potential consequences of failing to do so are outlined in the Pennsylvania Code and relevant case law.
Founders' Vision: Direct Democracy in the US Constitution?
You may want to see also
Intervention and final decision
In Pennsylvania, a party that files a pleading, written motion, or other paper drawing into question the constitutionality of a federal or state statute must promptly notify the Attorney General of Pennsylvania of the existence of the question. This notification must be in writing and include a copy of the pleadings or other portions of the record that raise the issue, along with proof of service of such notice. The Attorney General may then be heard on the question of the constitutionality of the statute without formal intervention. If the Attorney General chooses to intervene by filing a brief concerning the question, the Commonwealth shall be deemed an intervening party in the matter. This provision is intended to allow the Commonwealth to seek review in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania or the Supreme Court of the United States if there is an adverse decision on the constitutional question.
Before the time to intervene expires, the court may reject the constitutional challenge but may not enter a final judgment holding the statute unconstitutional. It is important to note that a party's failure to file and serve the notice, or the court's failure to certify, does not forfeit a constitutional claim or defense that is otherwise timely asserted.
In summary, challenging the constitutionality of a statute in Pennsylvania involves providing prompt written notification to the Attorney General, who may then intervene in the matter. The court may reject the challenge but cannot enter a final judgment without allowing for the possibility of intervention by the Attorney General and the Commonwealth.
Who Steps Up? The US Presidential Succession Plan
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The right to appeal
The Attorney General may then choose to intervene and be heard on the question of constitutionality without formal intervention. If the Attorney General files a brief, the Commonwealth becomes an intervening party in the matter. This process is designed to allow the Commonwealth to seek review in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania or the Supreme Court of the United States if there is an adverse decision on the constitutional question.
It is important to note that the failure to file and serve the notice does not forfeit a constitutional claim or defence. However, the court may reject the constitutional challenge before the time to intervene expires, without entering a final judgment on the statute's constitutionality.
The State, in such cases, has the rights and liabilities of a party regarding court costs to properly present the facts and law relating to the constitutional question. This ensures that all relevant information is considered in the appeal process.
The Constitution's Balance of Powers: A Delicate Dance
You may want to see also
Historical context
The history of Pennsylvania's Constitution dates back to the late 18th century, when the state adopted a new constitution in 1776. This constitution was a significant departure from the previous "frames of government" that had been in place since the era of William Penn. The 1776 Constitution was a product of a popular revolt against the existing government and marked a significant expansion of democratic principles in the state. It placed power in the hands of a single assembly, without a governor or an upper house to check its power, which some believed would lead to less effective governance.
However, the 1776 Constitution was short-lived, as a new constitution was adopted in 1790 soon after the Revolutionary War. This new constitution aimed to address the complexities of government and the rights of citizens, building upon the democratic foundation laid by its predecessor. The 1790 Constitution served as the basis for further constitutional development and democratic expansion in Pennsylvania.
In the mid-19th century, several cases highlighted the conflict between Pennsylvania's statutes and the US Constitution. For example, in United States v. Peters (1809), a Pennsylvania statute was held unconstitutional as it conflicted with federal court jurisdiction. Similarly, in Furman v. Nichol (1869), a Pennsylvania law taxing interest on railway bonds was found to be unenforceable as it impeded the obligation of contracts.
The current Pennsylvania Constitution, ratified in 1873 and effective from 1874, has undergone numerous amendments over the years. The first set of amendments occurred in 1901, 1909, and 1911, with subsequent amendments following in quick succession from 1913 to 1923. Additional amendments were made in 1928 and 1933 and through the mid-1960s. The Constitution was extensively amended again in 1966 and 1967, with proposals approved by the electorate in 1968. These amendments have shaped the document to meet the evolving needs and context of the state.
Adapting the Constitution: Changes for a Modern World
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
Rule 521 states that it is the duty of a party that questions the constitutionality of any statute in any matter in an appellate court to which the Commonwealth or any officer thereof is not a party, to give immediate notice in writing to the Attorney General of Pennsylvania.
The Attorney General may be heard on the question of the constitutionality of the statute involved without formal intervention. If the Attorney General files a brief concerning the question, the Commonwealth shall be deemed an intervening party.
The court must certify to the appropriate attorney general that a statute has been questioned. The court may reject the constitutional challenge before the time to intervene expires but may not enter a final judgment holding the statute unconstitutional.
The state shall certify such fact to the attorney general and permit the state to intervene for the presentation of evidence and for argument on the question of constitutionality.
Some examples include MCT Transportation, Inc. v. Philadelphia Parking Authority, Applewhite v. Commonwealth, and Himchak v. PA.
