Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane (D) Pennsylvania will soon find out if a criminal case against her will move forward. Philadelphia Supreme Court Justices will decide whether a judge had the authority to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate whether she leaked Grand Jury information. The five justices heard arguments from both sides on Wednesday.
Attorney General Kane appeared in the court with her legal team. Her attorney testified the judge had no legal authority to appoint a special prosecutor. The special prosecutor argued the supervising judge is the gatekeeper of secrecy.
The case started with accusations that Kane leaked grand jury information to the Philadelphia Inquirer. Kane's attorney Joseph Del Sole argued the presiding judge should have sent the investigation to a district attorney. He said the appointment of a Special Prosecutor violated state law.
"We're going to let the court make their own decision," said Attorney General Kane after the hearing.
Thomas Carluccio is the special prosecutor assigned to the case and who initiated the grand jury investigation. At the conclusion of that investigation he recommended Kane be charged with numerous crimes, including perjury. Kane's attorneys got a judge to put that decision on hold until the legality of the investigation is determined.
Carluccio argued before the justices that the judge who appointed him had legal authority and says Kane only spoke up at the end of the investigation because she didn't like the result.
"This investigation was to seek out the truth. There was no other motivation but to find the truth," said Carluccio.
One of the justices pointed out during the hearing that the judge in question wrote a letter to the Chief Justice which said he wasn't sure if he was overstepping his authority.
"It's going to be in my view a 3-2 decision. I can't begin to guess what the majority rule on this will be but it's going to be a precedent setting case," said Lawrence Otter who is a Constitutional Law Attorney who came to watch the hearing. "This is a very interesting case. How often does the Attorney General get cited for contempt," said Otter.
The justices did not make a decision today, but one could be issued by spring.