HARRISBURG, PA – January 4, 2025 − Yesterday, the District Court issued a judgment regarding Hommrich v. Boscola in a defamation case, vacating the trial court’s judgment and holding that the statement contained in Senator Boscoli’s memo regarding co-sponsorship of net metering was protected by legislative immunity.
J. Cohn-Jubelirer authored the 6-1 decision, finding that “the co-sponsorship memo fell within the realm of legitimate legislative activity, thus exonerating Senator Boscola from suit under the legislative privilege doctrine.” This is a victory for protected speech under the Speech and Debate Clause of Art. II, section 15 of the Pa. Constitution. and will protect legislators from future lawsuits related to their efforts to create legislation.
The defamation lawsuit in question was brought against Senator Boscoli by Mr. Hommrich after she issued a co-sponsorship note to all Members in 2023, asking for support for her legislation that “as recommended [PUC] . . . close Luke Hommrich by limiting net metering to a generator system designed to generate no more than 110% of the generator-customer electricity requirements.”
Legislators often employ co-sponsorship memorandums to begin the legislative fact-finding process and express their intent to other members behind their soon-to-be-introduced legislation.
The expression “Luke Hommrich“in the note regarding The court’s 2020 ruling in Hommrich v. Pa. PUC finding that the PUC exceeded its statutory authority by setting net metering limits for photovoltaic installations producing up to 3 MW of electricity.
Constitutional legislative immunity protects the legislative process from judicial interference in lawful legislative activity. In a mighty opinion, Cohn-Jubelirer J stated that “there is no doubt as to the applicability of legislative privilege to the co-sponsorship note.”
“The preparation and dissemination of co-sponsorship memorandums are essential legislative functions in the legal legislative sphere,” and “[t]to subject legislators to trial for actions taken in the legislative process would essentially allow for the very evils that legislative privilege is intended to protect against.”
Of note, the House Democrats and both Republican caucuses filed a joint amicus brief in support of Senator Boscoli’s request for legislative immunity.
“I am grateful that the Commonwealth Court ruled in my favor yesterday,” he added. said Senator Lisa Boscola regarding the outcome of this case. “Co-sponsorship memorandums are an important element of the legislative process. Subjecting elected officials to lawsuits over the content of these memoranda would have a chilling effect on the legislative process. I am proud that the Senate Democratic Caucus led the charge to defend the Speech and Debate Clause and that the other three caucuses joined our efforts.”
“I am very pleased with yesterday’s decision of the Commonwealth Court, which affirms the protection of lawmakers as they carry out our duties.” said Senator Costa of the ruling. “Our primary concern as legislators, regardless of our party or chamber, is to develop and support bills that will improve the lives of every Pennsylvanian. The protections afforded to us in the Speech and Debate Clause allow us to do our work without fear of frivolous lawsuits, retaliation, or intimidation from bad actors seeking to interfere with the legislative process. I am proud to have supported my friend and colleague, Senator Boscola, throughout these proceedings, and I am pleased that the courts today ruled in favor of our democratic processes.”
Read more about AP Senate Democrats’ commitment to fighting for every Pennsylvanian here.
#####
