In a recent court decision, the Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner's lawsuit seeking to stop Act 40 was denied. The law, passed late last year by Republicans in the General Assembly with support from Democratic votes, established the appointment of a special prosecutor by the attorney general's office to handle crimes occurring on or near SEPTA (Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority) property.

The Commonwealth Court, divided with a 4-3 vote, rejected Krasner's argument that the law violated the state Constitution. Krasner, a Democrat, expressed his disappointment with the decision, emphasizing that the law poses a "profound threat to democracy."

Krasner filed the lawsuit in January, claiming that the law unconstitutionally stripped him of his jurisdiction and removed core prosecutorial functions. He also criticized the law for being selective, stating that only in Philadelphia does it allow an unelected prosecutor to take away cases and powers. Krasner added that he always believed this case would ultimately reach the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

Under Act 40, the special prosecutor has the authority to take over crimes "within" SEPTA. When this occurs, the district attorney is required to suspend investigations and proceedings and hand over the case files to the special prosecutor. The law was passed amidst concerns over crime in Philadelphia, with some believing that Krasner's progressive policies have exacerbated the situation.

Krasner argued that he has effectively prosecuted the majority of crimes coming from SEPTA. However, he contended that Act 40 had little to do with public safety and was instead an attempt to disenfranchise Philadelphia voters. He cited recent statistics indicating a decrease in crime, including on mass transit, and emphasized that Philadelphia is leading the way in this regard.

In a dissenting opinion, Judge Christine Fizzano Cannon argued that the law improperly delegates legislative authority, giving the special prosecutor the power to interpret what "within" means regarding SEPTA. She also raised concerns about due process rights for criminal defendants, claiming that the law prevents them from challenging the special prosecutor's authority.

The Pennsylvania Attorney General's office informed the court that it was about to extend a firm job offer to a candidate for the special prosecutor position. The law mandates that the state attorney general appoint the new special prosecutor within 30 days. The appointed prosecutor cannot have worked for either the attorney general's office or Krasner's office in the past six years. The costs of the special prosecutor would be reimbursed by the city, with the attorney general's office responsible for providing a per diem salary equivalent to that of a district attorney.

The primary sponsor of the SEPTA prosecution jurisdiction bill, Senator Wayne Langerholc, a Republican from Cambria County, explained that he envisioned the special prosecutor selectively pursuing certain crimes while leaving the rest to Krasner. The law is set to expire with the end of Krasner's second term in December 2026.

Apart from this legal battle, Krasner is also awaiting a Supreme Court decision on whether the state Senate can proceed with a trial to potentially remove him from office. The Pennsylvania House, when controlled by Republicans last session, voted to impeach Krasner. However, the trial in the Republican-majority Senate is currently on hold pending the high court's ruling.

Reacting to the court's decision, Pennsylvania Senate Majority Leader Joe Pittman expressed optimism, stating that Act 40's upheld ruling will now allow the collaborative effort to begin with the appointment of a special prosecutor to oversee crimes occurring on SEPTA within the City of Philadelphia. Despite the law being passed several months ago, no special prosecutor has been appointed to the role thus far.