Pa. Senate takes first steps toward removing Kane from office

HARRISBURG - In an unprecedented move, the state Senate has taken the first steps toward removing embattled Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen G. Kane from office.

Under the state constitution, the governor can remove a public official for "reasonable cause" after a two-thirds vote in the Senate. The chamber, controlled by Republicans, would first have to hold a hearing.

Senate President Pro Tempore Joe Scarnati (R., Jefferson) said Friday that the chamber was forming a bipartisan committee as a precursor to such a hearing.

The key question the committee will examine is whether Kane, a Democrat whose law license was suspended by the state Supreme Court last month, can continue to perform her job as the state's top law enforcement officer, he said.

"This is, I think, a very serious, grave, and unprecedented action that the Senate is embarking on," the top Republican said.

The move was yet another political blow to Kane, whose license suspension went into effect this week. The Supreme Court voted unanimously to suspend her license because she is facing criminal charges in what prosecutors say was an illegal leak of confidential grand jury information. Many top Democrats, including Gov. Wolf, have called for her resignation.

Kane spokesman Chuck Ardo said Friday that the Senate's action was premature because the criminal case is pending.

"She believes that the course of action the Senate is considering is inappropriate," said Ardo.

He said Kane is not ruling out a legal challenge to the move, adding that there was a brief attempt in the late 1890s in which the governor attempted to invoke the removal clause to oust two officials elected statewide.

With their move, Senate leaders chose a path designed to speed up possible action against Kane and narrow their focus.

Unlike a move to impeach, the removal process requires action only by the Senate. The House would first have to vote to impeach, and then the Senate would serve in effect as a jury on removal from office.

They also chose to focus on whether Kane can serve without a functioning law license, rather than examining broader issues such as the criminal charges against her.

Scarnati told reporters Thursday that the Senate was on "firm footing." He said the constitution gives the chamber full authority to vote on removing all elected officials except the governor, the lieutenant governor, members of the General Assembly, and judges.

He said that the Senate would announce the committee's six members on Monday, and that it will have three Democrats and three Republicans.

The panel will have 30 days to report to the full Senate its findings. If it concludes that Kane can no longer perform the duties of her job, the committee would hold a hearing to determine whether she should be removed from office. The full Senate would then vote on the matter.

"Our view is that for now, this is an information-gathering effort," said Senate Minority Leader Jay Costa (D., Allegheny). "And it really has to be above reproach, so that the public is confident that the conclusion is not predetermined."

Kane has been charged with perjury, conspiracy, official oppression, and other crimes for allegedly leaking the confidential material in a bid to punish a critic. She has pleaded not guilty and has vowed to remain in office while fighting the charges.

She has said the criminal case against her was "corruptly manufactured" by people angry at her for attempting to shake up the status quo in Harrisburg.

Kane has said she does not believe the license suspension will hamper her day-to-day work. She has said that the majority of her work is "administrative and ministerial," and that she will be able to continue signing documents, having access to sensitive documents in criminal investigations, and counseling, on an advisory basis, on key cases.

Top lawyers in her office disagree with their boss about what she can or cannot do while her law license is suspended, Ardo has said.

Walter Cohen, a former acting attorney general, said he believes that Senate leaders may have erred in narrowing their focus to whether Kane has legal standing to continue in her job.

He noted that when the high court voted last month to suspend her license, it wrote that its order "should not be construed as removing [Kane] from elected office, and is limited to the temporary suspension of her license to practice law."

If the legislature is to remove Kane on the basis that she lacks legal standing, Cohen said, Kane would surely appeal to the high court, which appears to have made its position plain.

"I think that's a risky approach," Cohen said.

Cohen said he does not believe Kane's lack of an active license blocks her from running the Attorney General's Office. He noted that many nonlawyers have served as top state officials, making policy and even initiating lawsuits.

acouloumbis@phillynews.com

717-787-5934 @AngelasInk