'Technical error' omits discussion of judge's recusal from Commonwealth Court livestream

During oral arguments last week before the state’s Commonwealth Court, attorney John Smith, representing the Murrysville Watch Committee and its appeal challenging Murrysville’s unconventional gas drilling ordinance, requested that Judge J. Andrew Crompton recuse himself.

Moments afterward, the livestream feed of the public court proceeding cut to a hold screen, returning about five minutes later with the resumption of Smith’s argument and Crompton sitting as part of the judges’ panel.

Commonwealth Court Communications Director Stacey Witalec said the gap in the livestream was the result of a technical error. The Tribune-Review has obtained the full video of the proceeding.

Smith said he’d requested Crompton’s recusal because, during his time as chief of staff for state Sen. Joe Scarnati, Crompton helped craft the 2012 legislation known as Act 13, which addressed oil and gas operations statewide. In 2016, the state’s Supreme Court struck down a number of provisions in Act 13 as unconstitutional. Crompton also was involved in the Act 13 appeals process.

“I honestly didn’t think Judge Crompton would be assigned to this case where, on some of the precedents, he’s previously been on the other side,” Smith said. “This isn’t passing judgment on his ability by any means, I just have an obligation to protect my clients’ interests, so I felt I needed to put this on the record.”

During the portion of the proceeding that was not initially public, Crompton said he felt he was able to judge the matter impartially.

“I think the germane-ness of this whole argument is wrapped around the ordinance, which I obviously have no prior conflict with whatsoever,” Crompton said. “I looked at this case very carefully because, yes, I did have participation in the Robinson Township case, arguing a portion that failed before the Supreme Court.”

Commonwealth Court Judge Christine Fizzano Cannon suggested that Crompton remain as part of the panel, and that Smith could submit his recusal request in writing.

“Judge Crompton can consider that and, if he does decide to recuse himself, we can add a reading judge to the panel,” Cannon said.

A reading judge would fill in for Crompton in helping to decide the case, but would make a decision based on the briefs filed by the attorneys involved, rather than than based on the oral arguments presented in court.

Crompton said he views the issue “as the interpretation of a local ordinance, both prior and after Act 13.”

“I don’t have any bias toward this issue,” he said. “I’ve never contemplated it in my prior life.”

Smith filed an official request to consider Crompton’s recusal and disqualification on May 19.