NEW CASTLE —
So now what?
Last week’s conviction of Pennsylvania Supreme Court Justice Joan Orie Melvin on most of the corruption counts against her leads to the question above. What does the commonwealth do now that it has a convicted criminal sitting on the bench of its highest court?
Several options exist. Pennsylvania’s court system, for example, has a mechanism that allows for removal of judges found to have engaged in illegal or unethical activity. And the state’s constitution allows the Legislature to pursue impeachment.
That happened once before, with former Supreme Court Justice Rolf Larsen. But that was an agonizing process, and it tied the Legislature in knots, as lawmakers pursued an action with little precedent. Even if impeachment proceedings were to go more smoothly against Melvin, they almost surely would be slow and cumbersome.
And we suppose the same thing could be said about any action taken by Pennsylvania’s Judicial Conduct Board against Melvin. The process could take months.
This makes us wonder if any such effort is worth it. By the time the Legislature or Judicial Conduct Board is able to act, Melvin most likely will be sentenced on the charges she was convicted of last week. At that point, she automatically will be removed from office.
That’s how it works in Pennsylvania, as astute Lawrence County residents will recall from observing the Gary Felasco saga. The former Lawrence County treasurer — despite a litany of criminal counts and resultant conviction — was able to keep his elected post and its salary until he was sentenced.
The best thing to occur here would be for Melvin to do the right thing and resign. Sometimes that happens with elected officials convicted of crimes in the commonwealth. They at least have the decency to spare the taxpayers any further embarrassment and quietly give up their seats.
But it’s not required, as we learned from Felasco. So far, there’s no indication what Melvin will do. If she persists in claims she is innocent of charges related to the use of state employees for campaign work, the judge could hold on to her seat until sentencing.
One good thing is that Melvin has been on leave from the Supreme Court because of the charges against her. But that means there is a spot on the panel that needs to be filled. However, until she gives up her seat, or is forced from it, Melvin cannot be replaced.
Eventually, Melvin no longer will be a presence on the Supreme Court. That’s an unfortunate end to her career, but it’s an end she crafted for herself. Sadly, using tax dollars for political purposes — by paying state employees to work on campaigns — has been a widespread problem in Pennsylvania. It prompted the Bonusgate investigation.
Perhaps Melvin’s fate can serve a purpose if it reminds state politicians that abusing power in this fashion can carry a heavy cost.
NEW CASTLE —
So now what?
Our Opinion: College admission test undergoes real-world changes
In the realm of education, the Scholastic Aptitude Test has something of a make-or-break reputation. That’s because a student’s SAT results — or those of its counterpart, the ACT — are a major factor in the admissions decisions by colleges.
Our Opinion: Discovery of ancient virus raises concerns
In the 1951 science fiction classic “The Thing from Another World,” a spacecraft crashes in the arctic. A group of humans investigates and discovers an alien buried in ice. Once thawed, the alien poses a threat to the humans, who eventually destroy it.
Our Opinion: Some consumers pay price of changing power suppliers
Choice may be good, but an informed choice is even better. That’s the conclusion we draw from reports here in Lawrence County and elsewhere around Pennsylvania about some residents and businesses receiving electric bills that are substantially higher than normal.
Our Opinion: The West has decisions to make, and Russia may pay price
Let’s begin by acknowledging that the United States will not be sending troops to Ukraine. That country — despite an incursion by Russian troops — is not of vital strategic interest to America, and there is no treaty obligation to defend it.
Our Opinion: Giving Laurel teachers free tuition is inherently unfair
Whenever government hands out perks to its own, red flags are raised. And arguments that they cost taxpayers nothing can ring a little hollow.
Our Opinion:Tax reform proposal sounds good, but may lack support
If there’s one thing that Democrats and Republicans in Washington agree on, it’s that America needs a simpler tax code.
Our Opinion: Obama administration targets junk food ads
We anticipate some controversy over the Obama administration’s proposed new rules regarding schools and junk food. Mainly it will come from those who complain about federal meddling in public education.
Our Opinion: After five years, Jordan Brown case continues — sadly for all
It’s not unusual for newspapers to look back on major news events when key anniversaries come about. So it was that the New Castle News has been running articles on the fifth anniversary of the 2009 slaying of Kenzie Houk, and the subsequent arrest of Jordan Brown for the crime.
Our Opinion: Expanding gambling option falls flat on its face
Perhaps it’s good that every now and then, government gains a glimpse of the real world. And so it is with Pennsylvania’s latest effort to squeeze the goose that lays the golden gambling eggs.
Our Opinion: Examination of Sandusky case hurt by email deletions
How long should government keep records before throwing them away? It’s a question that became more than academic in Pennsylvania, in light of the Jerry Sandusky saga.
- More Editorials Headlines
- Our Opinion: College admission test undergoes real-world changes