Philly DA Krasner plans legal fight over Act 40

Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner brought forward litigation on Thursday in an effort to block implementation of Act 40 -- a recently enacted law that would see his authority to prosecute cases throughout much of the city stripped and replaced by a "special SEPTA prosecutor" appointed by the state's attorney general.

Surrounded by community leaders and supporters, Krasner detailed his case against the new law.

"When I made the unexpected decision to run for DA in 2017, I thought that meant District Attorney. I didn't know that meant democracy advocate," Krasner joked at the start of the event.

Local and community leaders, some who joined the DA on Thursday, have spoken out against Act 40, suggesting the law could be unconstitutional as it may disenfranchise voters who elected Krasner.

Krasner noted the failed effort to impeach him that was led by Republican leaders in Harrisburg.

"This is straight up an effort to erase the votes of 155,102 people who struggled through the inconvenience of voting so they would be heard in an election that was won by a margin of 44-percent," he said. "That is what we are talking about."

NBC10 has obtained a letter that the District Attorney's office has sent to Pennsylvania Attorney General Michelle Henry's office, detailing Krasner's argument against Act 40.

For background, the legislation, sponsored by Republican state senator Wayne Langerholc, who represents the state's 35th state senatorial district, allows the state's attorney general to appoint a special prosecutor on any crime that occurs on -- and, according to the Krasner's office, within 500-yards of -- any SEPTA property in Philadelphia.

That means most of the city would fall under the jurisdiction of the new special prosecutor.

However, it should be noted that once outside of Philadelphia, this special prosecutor would have no authority over crimes committed on or around SEPTA properties.

This element of the law discriminates against Philadelphia, according to John S. Summers, a lawyer working with Krasner's office on this litigation.

Summers noted his office reviewed legislation dating back to the founding of the Commonwealth that would strip an elected district attorney from his responsibility in any similar way.

"This law is unprecedented," said Summers.

Krasner's office argues the law is targeted at him and is essentially a "back door" to removing him from office by installing someone to supersede his authority.

Yet, there could be significant issues on how this would be implemented.

The legislation itself never mentions exact boundaries of the special prosecutor's jurisdiction -- and never specifically mentions SEPTA, either.

Instead, it gives the not as yet appointed special prosecutor the ability to "investigate and institute criminal proceedings for a violation of the laws of this Commonwealth occurring within a public transportation authority that serves as the primary provider of public passenger transportation in the county of the first class."

Philadelphia is Pennsylvania's only county of the first class.

Summers argued that the legislation was unconstitutional for these, and other, reasons and said the law enables an unelected official to usurp the district attorney's authority, leading an elected official, who would be considered accountable to voters, to be replaced by an appointed officer, accountable to no one.

"Act 40, about SEPTA, is a constitutional train wreck. It is a tangle that cannot and should not be enforced," said Summers.

To fund the office, Philadelphia taxpayers would pay the special prosecutor's office and the state's Attorney General's office for any costs incurred by the new office. And, any state funding that would have gone to Krasner's office, would go to the special prosecutor instead, under Act 40.

"[T]he Commonwealth may not reimburse that county for the salary of the district attorney of that county. An amount equal to the reimbursement that would have been made if no special prosecutor had been appointed shall be used to reimburse the Office of Attorney General for the compensation of the special prosecutor and any expenses incurred for the purpose of carrying out the duties of the special prosecutor," reads the legislation.

In a statement, Krasner's office noted that Act 40 was passed by Governor Josh Shapiro "as part of an overdue state budget package."

And yet, the statement suggests, if Act 40 is intended to protect SEPTA riders, then why not approve a no-new-tax move that would have helped SEPTA bridge a looming budget gap?

"SEPTA’s projected operating deficit of $240 million was not addressed in the state budget and will result in service cuts that negatively impact the reliability and safety of one of the largest public transit systems in the country (a reported weekly average of 699,000 passengers)," noted the statement from Krasner's office.

Contacted Wednesday, the state's Attorney General's office -- which had said it was reviewing Act 40 to determine how the special prosecutor's office might be funded -- said that Henry intends to name someone to fill that role by the deadline, which would be on Saturday, Jan. 13.

"As required by Act 40, the Office of Attorney General is working to fulfill our legal obligation by appointing a special prosecutor within the mandated timeframe," a representative for Henry's office told NBC10.