Sunday, November 25, 2012

Pennsylvania Judges Claim Mandatory Retirement Violates Equal Protection Clause

Six Pennsylvania judges filed a lawsuit today in Harrisburg claiming that a provision of the Pennsylvania Constitution, which mandates all Pennsylvania justices and judges retire at the end of the calendar year in which they turn 70, violates their rights under the Equal Protection and Due Process clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and under Article I of the Pennsylvania Constitution.

The lawsuit, filed by Robert C. Heim of Dechert LLP in the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania on behalf of Judge John Driscoll, Judge John W. Herron, Senior Judge Benjamin Lerner, Judge Sandra Mazer Moss, Judge Joseph D. O'Keefe and Judge Leonard N. Zito, names as defendants Governor Thomas W. Corbett Jr., Secretary of Pennsylvania Carol T. Aichele, Treasurer of Pennsylvania Robert M. McCord and Court Administrator Zygmont A. Pines.

"Some of our finest and most experienced legal minds are being denied unfairly the opportunity to serve the people of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, solely because of their age," said Heim, who is serving as pro bono counsel for the judges. "In today's world, there is no good reason to think that judges who are 70 are not equally competent as judges who are younger."

Full Article and Source:
Pennsylvania Judges Claim Mandatory Retirement Violates Equal Protection Clause
See Also:
Judges Say 70 Isn't Too Old for the Bench

3 comments:

StandUp said...

I'm for mandatory retirement for judges. It will help keep the bench clean.

Anonymous said...

It's essential that there be a mandatory age for retirement.

Lisa said...

70 is too old for judges to be on the bench. Common sense should tell us that.