Legal Opinion

Driscoll v. Corbett

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided June 17, 2013PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

Justice SAYLOR.

Challenging an express constitutional command and attendant judicial precedent, Petitioners seek to nullify the mandatory retirement provision of the Pennsylvania Constitution applicable to judicial officers.

I

By way of background, in 1967-68, a limited constitutional convention was convened with the approval of Pennsylvania voters. Its purpose was to consider certain proposed changes to the state charter, including changes to Article V, which pertains to the judiciary. The proposed revisions that emerged from the various committees and subcommittees were subject to…

2Cases cited37 opinions

  1. Meyer v. NebraskaSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
  2. West Virginia State Board of Education v. BarnetteSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
  3. Massachusetts Board of Retirement v. MurgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  4. Gregory v. AshcroftSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  5. Commonwealth v. EdmundsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1991

32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. Robinson Township v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
  2. In re BrunoSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
  3. Zauflik, A., Aplt. v. Pennsbury School DistrictSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
  4. In re Fortieth Statewide Investigating Grand JurySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
  5. In Re Angeles Roca First Judicial District Philadelphia CountySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2017

21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API