Inconvenient Precedents II

The Pennsylvania Law Weekly has an article just out on the legal morass the city is entering as it attempts to figure out when the next mayoral race will be. I think somebody mentioned several weeks ago the two important precendents that are probably going do decide this: Watson v. Witkin 343 PA 1, 22 A.2d 17 (1941)and Cali v. Philadelphia 406 Pa. 290; 177 A.2d 824; 1962. Local media still does not seem to want to get near this issue yet.

The problem really is that whenever the games begin, you know it will take some time to resolve as it works its way through the courts. And it will start eventually. I think any taxpayer has standing to sue to stop an election. Probably any registered voter has standing to try and force an election. That's not to say a judge would agree, but anyone can bring the case.

by the way, has the city found judge to rule on this whole situation yet? Is anyone asking about it? While I agree that events are still pretty recent, remember there is not much time to figure this out. Forget just campaigning, for there to be a May election, it must be set 60 days prior just for the election machinery to make that happen. So any legal wranglings might need to be settled by March you would think. What is that 5-6 months at most, in practicality it must be a lot less.