Pennsylvania: Judge J. Andrew (Drew) Crompton, who helped craft Act 13 (parts later struck as unconstitutional) and publicly boasted of his “Shell shirt” in 2016, recuses himself from Murrysville frac appeal case

The Order

Commonwealth Court judge recuses himself from Murrysville fracking appeal case by Patrick Varine, June 28, 2021, Murrysville Star

A Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania judge whose previous career included helping craft state fracking legislation has recused himself from a case involving local fracking laws.

Judge J. Andrew Crompton issued an order Monday granting the Murrysville Watch Committee’s request that he recuse himself from the panel adjudicating its appeal. The committee is appealing a lower court ruling denying its challenge to the validity of Murrysville’s existing unconventional gas drilling ordinance.

During his time as chief of staff for state Sen. Joe Scarnati and as a staff attorney for the General Assembly, Crompton helped craft the 2012 legislation known as Act 13, which addressed oil and gas operations statewide. In 2016, the state’s Supreme Court struck down a number of provisions in Act 13 as unconstitutional. Crompton was also involved in the Act 13 appeals process.

“We pointed out that there were two other occasions where the court alerted us that they were recusing themselves,” said John Smith, a Pittsburgh attorney representing the Murrysville Watch Committee. “This is the first time I’ve had to ask a court officer to recuse him- or herself. And we were appreciative that he took our application seriously and made the decision he did.”

During the original May 10 proceeding, court officials said a technical error prevented most of the discussion about Crompton’s potential recusal from being livestreamed to the public.

In a footnote statement included with Monday’s decision, Crompton said that his decision came “despite my self-assessment and resulting confidence that I have no bias relative to the present matter and that I can render a decision fairly and impartially, especially in light of the passage of nearly a decade since I was involved.”

Smith and the committee’s brief argued that Crompton’s participation creates the appearance of impropriety, and Crompton said he would “out of an abundance of caution, and to avoid any such perception in the mind of any objective person, however unlikely, recuse myself from further participation in this case.”

At the May 10 appeal proceeding, Commonwealth Court officials said if Crompton recused himself, that another judge would be assigned to the three-judge panel to read the transcribed oral arguments and help render a decision.

“That’s what they suggested and we’ll see if that’s what happens,” Smith said.

Commonwealth Court spokesperson Stacey Witalec said the court will appoint a “reading judge” who will review the record and the parties’ appellate briefs, and decide the case along with the two other panel members who heard oral arguments.

Commonwealth Court judge recuses himself from Murrysville fracking appeal case by Patrick Varine, TRIBLive, June 28, 2021

Inline image
Attorney John Smith gives his opening statement during the Murrysville Watch Committee’s original validity challenge of the Murrysville fracking ordinance on Thursday, November 29, 2018. That decision is currently on appeal to the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania. 

A Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania judge whose previous career included helping craft state fracking legislation has recused himself from a case involving local fracking laws.

Judge J. Andrew Crompton issued an order Monday granting the Murrysville Watch Committee’s request that he recuse himself from the panel adjudicating its appeal. The committee is appealing a lower court ruling denying its challenge to the validity of Murrysville’s existing unconventional gas drilling ordinance.

During his time as chief of staff for state Sen. Joe Scarnati and as a staff attorney for the General Assembly, Crompton helped craft the 2012 legislation known as Act 13, which addressed oil and gas operations statewide. In 2016, the state’s Supreme Court struck down a number of provisions in Act 13 as unconstitutional. Crompton was also involved in the Act 13 appeals process.

“We pointed out that there were two other occasions where the court alerted us that they were recusing themselves,” said John Smith, a Pittsburgh attorney representing the Murrysville Watch Committee. “This is the first time I’ve had to ask a court officer to recuse him- or herself. And we were appreciative that he took our application seriously and made the decision he did.”

During the original May 10 proceeding, court officials said a technical error prevented most of the discussion about Crompton’s potential recusal from being livestreamed to the public.

In a footnote statement included with Monday’s decision, Crompton said that his decision came “despite my self-assessment and resulting confidence that I have no bias relative to the present matter and that I can render a decision fairly and impartially, especially in light of the passage of nearly a decade since I was involved.”

Smith and the committee’s brief argued that Crompton’s participation creates the appearance of impropriety, and Crompton said he would “out of an abundance of caution, and to avoid any such perception in the mind of any objective person, however unlikely, recuse myself from further participation in this case.”

At the May 10 appeal proceeding, Commonwealth Court officials said if Crompton recused himself, that another judge would be assigned to the three-judge panel to read the transcribed oral arguments and help render a decision.

“That’s what they suggested and we’ll see if that’s what happens,” Smith said.Commonwealth Court spokesperson Stacey Witalec said the court will appoint a “reading judge” who will review the record and the parties’ appellate briefs, and decide the case along with the two other panel members who heard oral arguments.

**

Refer also to:

2021: Pennsylvania: Pro-frac’ing judge must recuse himself from a frac hearing? “Hell Yes!”

2016:

2014: Application for reargument denied! Pa. Supreme Court will not reconsider Act 13 decision

2013: VICTORY! Pennsylvania Supreme Court Says It’s Unconstitutional For Gas Companies To Frack Wherever They Want; Act 13, Gas Industry Takeover Law thrown out by State’s Highest Court

This entry was posted in Global Frac News, Other Legal. Bookmark the permalink.