Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

File:Writ 1702.jpg signed in 1702 by then Provincial Court of Pennsylvania chief justice John Guest]]

File:Pennsylvania Supreme Court - Independence Hall.png]]

File:Pennsylvania State Capitol Supreme Court.jpg in Harrisburg]]

File:Pennsylvania State Capitol Supreme Court painting.jpg on the wall of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's chambers in the Pennsylvania State Capitol]]

The original Pennsylvania constitutions, drafted by William Penn, established a Provincial Court under the control of his British governors. The General Assembly, however, espoused the principle of separation of powers and formally called for a third branch of government starting with the 1701 Judiciary Bill. In 1722, the appointed British governor needed the House to raise revenues. House leaders agreed to raise taxes in return for an independent Supreme Court. Until 1776, legislation and judicial decisions in Pennsylvania, as in various American colonies, were subject to review by the Privy Council of the United Kingdom in London.

Between 1780 and 1808, a Pennsylvania High Court of Errors and Appeals existed, which was the court of last resort in Pennsylvania. After that court's dissolution in 1808, the Commonwealth's Supreme Court became, and remains, the court of last resort in the Pennsylvania judiciary.

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania predates the United States Supreme Court by more than 100 years. Interpreting the Pennsylvania Constitution, it was one of the first appellate courts in the United States to claim the power to declare laws made by an elected legislative body unconstitutional (Respublica v. Duquet, [https://cite.case.law/yeates/2/493 2 Yeates 493 (1799)]).

The court meets in three cities: Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and Harrisburg.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court consists of seven justices, each elected to ten year terms. Supreme Court judicial candidates may run on party tickets. The justice with the longest continuous service on the court automatically becomes Chief Justice. Justices must step down from the Supreme Court when they reach the age of 75 (at the end of the calendar year), but they may continue to serve part-time as "senior justices" on panels of the Commonwealth's lower appellate courts until they reach 78, the age of mandatory retirement.{{cite web |url=http://www.pacourts.us/Links/Public/JudicialQualifications.htm |title=Judicial Qualifications, Election, Tenure and Vacancies |publisher=The Unified Judicial System of Pennsylvania }}

Prior to 2002, judicial candidates in Pennsylvania were prohibited from expressing their views on disputed legal or political issues. However, after a similar law in Minnesota was struck down as unconstitutional (Republican Party of Minnesota v. White), the Pennsylvania rules were amended, and judicial candidates may now express political viewpoints as long as they do not "commit or appear to commit the candidate with respect to cases, controversies or issues that are likely to come before the court." (PA Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon 7 (B)(1)(c)){{cite web |url=http://www.pacode.com/secure/data/207/chapter33/chap33toc.html |title=Pennsylvania Code |publisher=pacode.com }}

After the ten-year term expires, a statewide yes or no vote for retention is conducted. A judge who is retained serves another ten-year term. If the judge is not retained, the governor, subject to the approval of the State Senate, appoints a temporary replacement until a special election can be held. As of 2005, only one judge has failed to win retention. After the 2005 Pennsylvania General Assembly pay raise controversy, Justice Russell M. Nigro received a majority of no votes in the election of 2005.{{cite web |title=Pennsylvania Ousts Supreme Court Justice |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/10/us/pennsylvania-ousts-supreme-court-justice.html |website=nytimes.com |publisher=The New York Times |access-date=3 June 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231219005215/https://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/10/us/pennsylvania-ousts-supreme-court-justice.html |archive-date=19 December 2023 |date=10 November 2005 |url-status=live}} He was replaced by Justice Cynthia Baldwin, who was appointed by Governor Rendell in 2005.

Only one Supreme Court Justice, Rolf Larsen, has been removed from office by impeachment. In 1994, the State House of Representatives handed down articles of impeachment consisting of seven counts of misconduct. A majority of the State Senate voted against Larsen in five of the seven counts but only one charge garnered the two-thirds majority needed to convict.

Under the 1874 Constitution and until the Pennsylvania state constitution of 1968, Supreme Court justices were elected to 21-year terms. At the time, it was the longest term of any elected office in the United States.{{Cite news|url=https://ballotpedia.org/Pennsylvania_Supreme_Court|title=Pennsylvania Supreme Court - Ballotpedia|work=Ballotpedia|access-date=2018-10-29|language=en-US}}

{{main|List of justices of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania}}

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania consists of seven members who are elected to ten-year terms as justices.

{{notelist}}

File:E v. R.png

• Eakin v. Raub (1825), in which the Court held that it has the authority of judicial review over state laws if they contradict the state constitution.
• Commonwealth v. Mimms (1975), in which the Court held that the unlawful possession charges as well as the relevant convictions and sentences against Harry Mimms over his illicit possession and concealed carry of an unlicensed firearm must be vacated and his case should be remanded for a new trial with the suppression of evidence due to violations of his Fourth Amendment rights; overturned by the Supreme Court of the United States in Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106 (1977).Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 471 Pa. 546, [https://www.casemine.com/judgement/us/5914c5e5add7b049347d7400] (March 31, 1975)
• League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania v. Commonwealth (2018), in which the Court held that the 2011 congressional map by the state's legislature constituted an illegal, partisan gerrymander and consequently ordered the congressional map to be redrawn.League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, No. 159 MM 2018, [https://www.pacourts.us/Storage/media/pdfs/20211214/194537-feb.19,2018-opinionandorderadoptingremedialplan.pdf] (PA February 19, 2018)
• Commonwealth v. Williams (2014), in which the Court held that the stay of execution against Terrence "Terry" Williams is overturned despite the lack of recusal on the part of then Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania Ronald D. Castille for his prosecution of Williams as a former District Attorney of Philadelphia; overturned by the Supreme Court of the United States in Williams v. Pennsylvania, 579 U.S. ___ (2016).Pennsylvania v. Williams, 105 A.3d 1234 (Pa. 2014), [https://casetext.com/case/commonwealth-v-williams-753] (PA December 15, 2014)Williams v. Pennsylvania, No. 15–5040, [https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/579/15-5040/case.pdf] (US June 9, 2016)
• Commonwealth v. Davis (2019), in which the Court held that the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America protects individuals from forcibly relinquishing the passwords of their digital accounts to law enforcement.Pennsylvania v. Davis, No. 56-2018, [https://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Supreme/out/J-42-2019mo%20-%2010422940787775633.pdf?cb=1] (PA November 29, 2019){{cite web |url=https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/11/victory-pennsylvania-supreme-court-rules-police-cant-force-you-tell-them-your |title=Victory: Pennsylvania Supreme Court Rules Police Can't Force You to Tell Them Your Password |website=Eff |first=Andrew |last=Crocker |date=November 20, 2019}}
• Commonwealth v. Cosby (2021), in which the Court held that the sexual assault charges as well as the relevant convictions and sentences against disgraced celebrity Bill Cosby over his rape of Andrea Constand must be vacated, he must be discharged from prison, and any future litigation over such crime must be barred due to violations of his due process rights.Pennsylvania v. Cosby, No. 39-2020, [https://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Supreme/out/J-100-2020mo%20-%20104821740139246918.pdf] (PA June 30, 2021){{cite web |url=https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/06/30/arts/television/bill-cosby-court-opinion.html |title=Bill Cosby's Conviction Is Overturned: Read the Court's Opinion |website=The New York Times |date=June 30, 2021 |access-date=2022-10-28}}
• Commonwealth v. Barr II (2021), in which the Court held that warrantless searches are unjustified if they are predicated upon the odor of cannabis alone.Pennsylvania v. Bar II, No. 28-2021, [https://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Supreme/out/J-70-2021mo%20-%20104999017155668065.pdf?cb=1] (PA December 29, 2021){{cite web |url=https://www.pghcitypaper.com/pittsburgh/pa-supreme-court-says-warrantless-searches-not-justified-by-cannabis-smell-alone/Content?oid=20837777 |title=Pa. Supreme Court says warrantless searches not justified by cannabis smell alone |website=Pittsburgh City Paper |first=Ryan |last=Deto |date=December 30, 2021}}

{{Commons}}

{{portal|Pennsylvania}}

• State supreme court
• King's Bench jurisdiction
• Superior Court of Pennsylvania
• Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
• List of state and county courthouses in Pennsylvania
• Marbury v. Madison
• Andrea Constand v. William H. Cosby, Jr.

• [https://www.pacourts.us/courts/supreme-court Supreme Court of Pennsylvania]

{{Coord|40|15|52|N|76|53|0|W|region:US-PA_type:landmark|display=title}}

{{US Judiciaries}}

{{Portal bar|Law}}

{{authority control}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Supreme Court Of Pennsylvania}}

Category:Pennsylvania State Capitol Complex

Category:1722 establishments in Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania

Category:1684 establishments in Pennsylvania

Category:Courts and tribunals established in 1684

Category:Courts and tribunals established in 1722