Archive

ShareThis Page
Senate moves toward removing Attorney General Kathleen Kane | TribLIVE.com
News

Senate moves toward removing Attorney General Kathleen Kane

Brad Bumsted
| Wednesday, December 9, 2015 7:03 p.m
PennsylvaniaAttorneyGeneralJPEG02a75
The Senate on Wednesday, Dec. 9, 2015, unanimously approved a resolution to move forward with a hearing that could lead to a vote next month on removing Attorney General Kathleen Kane from office. The resolution sets a Jan. 12 hearing for Kane to present her case, if she chooses, on how she is able to perform her duties without an active law license. She may also submit written testimony.

HARRISBURG — The Senate on Wednesday unanimously approved a resolution to move forward with a hearing that could lead to a vote next month on removing Attorney General Kathleen Kane from office.

The resolution sets a Jan. 12 hearing for Kane to present her case, if she chooses, on how she is able to perform her duties without an active law license. She may also submit written testimony.

“The attorney general continues to believe the action taken by the Senate is unconstitutional and will decide how to proceed from this point forward,” Kane’s spokesman Chuck Ardo said.

Senate Majority Leader Jake Corman, R-Centre County, said the “whole issue” is Kane’s ability to do the job with a suspended license. “This is not about the legal (criminal) issues she’s dealing with,” Corman said.

Is the commonwealth “at risk” in civil and criminal litigation because of Kane’s inability to practice law? Corman asked.

Sen. Stewart Greenleaf, R-Montgomery County, supports the resolution but advises his colleagues to slow it down. “I would think we would take our time with this while the whole process unfolds,” he said.

Kane was suspended effective Oct. 22 by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. Kane stands accused of two counts of felony perjury and 10 misdemeanors including obstruction of justice and oppression. Kane has repeatedly stated she broke no laws or committed any crimes.

Democratic senators said earlier in the Senate Rules Committee that by supporting the resolution, they are not making a statement about the validity of removing Kane.

“I’ll support the resolution for the basis of setting forth the basis of the hearing,” said Sen. Larry Farnese, D-Philadelphia.

“The vote is to give due process,” said Sen. Tommy Tomlinson, R-Bucks County.

Kane’s hearing would be held before the Senate Committee on Address, a bipartisan panel. Within 15 days of a hearing, a report and transcript would be sent to the Senate.

Sen. Anthony Williams, D-Philadelphia, an attorney, said Wednesday senators should dampen their expectations about Kane testifying. “I don’t know any attorney of note who would allow her to do so” while facing criminal charges, Williams said.

In November, the committee held three hearings with expert testimony about the office of attorney general, the constitution and what constitutes practicing law.

The Senate is controlled by Republicans. Kane, 49, of Scranton, is a Democrat elected in 2012.

The Senate is using Article VI Section 7 of the Pennsylvania Constitution that permits removal of a statewide elected officer, other than governor, lieutenant governor, and lawmakers, for “reasonable cause.” It requires a supermajority vote in the Senate directing the governor to remove her. That means a two-thirds vote with Democratic support.

Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf called for Kane to resign after she was charged in August, but Wolf hasn’t said what he would do if presented with a petition for her removal.

Kane says 98 percent of the job is administrative and 2 percent is legal. Many experts sharply disagree.

Kane maintains impeachment, which starts in the House, is the only viable constitutional option upon conviction of a crime.

Brad Bumsted is Trib Total Media’s state Capitol reporter. He can be reached at 717-787-1405 or bbumsted@tribweb.com.

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.