Article I, Section 8:
United States v. Skouras, 2025 WL 19818 (M.D. Pa. Jan. 2, 2025), per Conner, J., the Middle District of Pennsylvania held that a search warrant for the defendant’s property was supported by probable cause and thus constitutional under both the federal and Pennsylvania constitutions where there were multiple citizen complaints and police observations of drug-related activity. The court rejected the defendant’s argument that Pennsylvania’s Medical Marijuana Act invalidated the use of marijuana odor as a basis for probable cause, emphasizing that federal precedent still permitted reliance on such observations.
Article II, Section 1:
East Coast Vapor LLC v. Dept. of Revenue, — A.3d –, 2025 WL 24357 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2025), per Wolf, J., the Commonwealth Court held that provisions of the Tobacco Products Tax Act (TPTA) that allowed the Department of Revenue to request information from applicants for a manufacturer’s license was an unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority. The court found that the TPTA’s licensing provisions failed to provide sufficient standards to limit the Department’s discretion and therefore violated Article II, Section 1 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, which vests legislative power solely in the General Assembly.
Article II, Section 15:
Hommich v. Boscola, — A.3d –, 2025 WL 24368 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2025), per Jubelirer, J., the Commonwealth Court held that Senator Lisa Boscola was protected by legislative privilege under Article II, Section 15 of the Pennsylvania Constitution when she used the plaintiff’s name to refer to a legal loophole in a memorandum. The plaintiff, a solar energy developer, sued for defamation after Senator Boscola circulated a memorandum to fellow legislators advocating for a bill to close the so-called “Hommrich loophole.” The Commonwealth Court found that the memorandum was part of Senator Boscola’s core legislative function and thus protected under legislative privilege.
Article III, Section 18:
Herold v. University of Pittsburgh, — A.3d –, 2025 WL 258783 (Pa. 2025), per Todd, C.J., the Pennsylvania Supreme Court held that the interpretation of the Occupational Disease Act (“ODA”) must align with Article III, Section 18 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, which requires reasonable compensation for workplace injuries. The court acknowledged that the constitutional history of workers’ compensation in Pennsylvania reflects an intent to ensure workers receive compensation while allowing for an exclusive statutory remedy system. Thus, the court found that claims for occupational diseases, such as mesothelioma, which manifest beyond four years after the last employment are not barred by the ODA’s exclusivity provision and that the ODA’s four-year statute of limitations does not preclude an employee from pursuing common-law claims against an employer.
Article IV, Section 20:
Lara v. Commissioner Pa. State Police, 125 F.4th 428 (3d Cir. 2025), per Jordan, J., the Third Circuit held that Pennsylvania laws prohibiting 18-to-20-year-olds from carrying firearms in public during a state of emergency violated the Second Amendment. The court also considered Article IV, Section 20 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, which was amended to limit the governor’s authority to issue emergency declarations to 21 days. The court noted that while this amendment reduced the likelihood of prolonged emergencies, the historical pattern of frequent emergency declarations in Pennsylvania made it likely that similar constitutional challenges would arise.