| Sign up | Log in | Forgot Password |
Why I am withdrawing from my casino law suit Seven weeks ago I filed a law suit with other community leaders in
challenging the decision of the state Gaming Board to locate two Las
Vegas size casinos in residential neighborhoods. At my direction, my
attorney filed the necessary papers yesterday to end my
participation in this law suit (see my letter below).
I take this step not because I think this or any of the other
casino law suits filed by residents lacks merit, but because I no
longer believe that our state Supreme Court possesses the necessary
moral courage, impartiality and political independence to rule fairly
and wisely on the issues before it.
Recently, the Supreme Court ordered that the casino referendum
should not appear on the ballot for the upcoming May 15 primary
election while it considered legal questions raised by the casinos and
the Gaming Board. Interfering in an election, the foundation of our
democracy, is a drastic step for any court to take, yet this Court did
so without issuing an opinion. This "Sin of Omission" by the current
Supremes is especially troubling to me because it suggests:
According to Professor Bruce Ledewitz of Duquesne Law School, the current
Supreme Court often fails to issue opinions in politically charged
cases, issuing an order and leaving it at that. This is unacceptable.
If Pennsylvanians are to have any confidence that the decisions of
this Supreme Court are fair and not the product of some backroom deal
, it must explain its decision. Through its opinions, our Supreme
Court must explain in detail how it arrived at its decision by
impartially applying the law to the facts of the case.
We give judges a tremendous amount of power and freedom from the
usual accountability demanded of public servants. If this Court isn't
willing to explain their reasoning for having interfered in an
election, what does that say about the commitment of the seven men and
women on the Court to serve in a government "by and for the people?"
By Ed Goppelt
Wednesday, 04/25/07
(1177504510253)
April 20, 2007
Alan M. Sandals, Esq. Sandals & Associates, P.C.
Re: Ending my participation in the casino litigation
Dear Alan:
Thank you representing me and other residents in our appeal of the Gaming Board’s licensing decision as well as the Gaming Board’s suit to stop the casino referendum. After thoughtful consideration, I ask that you end my participation in this litigation.
I take this action fully aware that it will likely complicate your work and may make the Pennsylvania Supreme Court even less inclined to rule for residents than it currently is. For this I apologize.
However, being a party to this litigation has significant costs for me, despite your pro bono representation. For example, I cannot report on the Gaming Board, nor can I speak out publicly about the Supreme Court.
Since I no longer believe that the Supreme Court is likely to rule fairly in this matter, I have come to the conclusion that it is best for all concerned if I withdraw as an appellant.
Thank you again for the energy and skill with which you have fought for my interests and those of my neighbors. I hope that I am wrong and that the Supreme Court will show wisdom and compassion when deciding whether to place Las Vegas size casinos into thriving residential neighborhoods.
Sincerely,
Edmund Goppelt