Some people up in Attorney General Kathleen Kane’s home town of Scranton don’t like Kathleen Kane.
This became obvious when the usually Democrat leaning Scranton Times-Tribune Editorial “Kane’s ploy unwarranted” renewed its call for her resignation on the grounds that she had the temerity to question the legality of Gov. Tom Wolf creating a moratorium on executions in Pennsylvania.
“Ms. Kane asked the state Supreme Court on Wednesday to invalidate Gov. Tom Wolf’s moratorium on executions. She wants the court to allow the execution of Hubert L. Michael Jr. for the 1993 murder of a York County teenage girl…
“Mr. Wolf put executions on hold pending results from a task force study of the state’s death penalty. The Legislature approved the review in 2011, prior to Mr. Wolf’s election.”
The editors are suggesting that the recommendations of a task force would overrule the Pennsylvania Constitution. That is patent nonsense.
The issue is simple: With or without the recommendation of a task force, does Wolf as governor have the authority to create a moratorium on executions?
Kane as the chief law enforcer in the state wants that issue decided by the courts now, not later when much money has been spent on a possible wild goose chase.
(Who knows, perhaps Wolf asked her to check this out with the courts before the issue became an embarrassment to him.)
Conscientiously enforcing the law and conceivably saving taxpayer money hardly seems to us as a reason to ask someone to resign. It seems more like a strong argument for their reelection.
Perhaps the editors’ befuddlement is caused by an attorney general challenging the legality of an action taken by a governor of the same political party. Real politicians just don’t do that type of thing!
