Editorial: Are calls to remove district judge appropriate?

In a courtroom, there are rules about what can be introduced and when and how.

For example, you can’t use evidence of a prior bad act as proof that someone did a new and different crime. You also can’t prosecute someone for a crime committed before a law was passed.

The reason is simple. Each incident that comes before the court has to be considered independently; and you cannot say someone broke a rule that didn’t exist when the act occurred.

The person who generally enforces those rules is the one wearing the black robe. Whether in a local magisterial court or the U.S. Supreme Court, the judges or justices are the referees who make sure the game is being played according to the established parameters.

Right now, there are political calls being made, not about a defendant but about a judge. Several politicians, including Allegheny County Councilman-at-large Sam DeMarco, R-North Fayette, and state House whip Tim O’Neal, R-Washington County, are calling for District Judge Xander Orenstein to be removed from office.

The demands are coming after the stabbing death of Benjamin Brallier, 44, a civilian employee of the Pennsylvania State Police. Brallier’s body was found Monday along the Montour Trail in Moon. Police have charged Anthony Quesen, 25, with homicide.

What does this have to do with Orenstein?

In June 2023, Quesen, then in court records as Antonia Kaseim, appeared before Orenstein after an incident at Point State Park involving an assault and robbery before jumping into the Allegheny River. Court administrators recommended nonmonetary bond. Orenstein followed that recommendation. Quesen was admitted for psychiatric evaluation but subsequently missed court dates. Bench warrants were issued.

Quesen is the third person Orenstein has released without bond to cause controversy. In September 2023, Yan Carlos Pichardo Cepeda was arrested for possession of $1.6 million worth of fentanyl and a kilogram of cocaine. Pichardo Cepeda already was out on bond from New York. Orenstein released him without bail. Unsurprisingly, he did not show up for his court appearance a week later. TribLive questioned Orenstein’s actions at that time.

Weeks later, Hermas Craddock appeared before Orenstein. He was charged with firearms offenses, marijuana possession and escape. Again, Orenstein let him go without bail. In April, he was arrested after a high-speed chase that prompted dozens of new charges, including four felonies.

After that, Allegheny County Common Pleas President Judge Susan Evashavik DiLucente removed Orenstein from presiding over arraignments. Those are the initial appearances where bond is decided. TribLive applauded that decision.

But is it right to call for Orenstein’s removal now? That’s where we come back to the rules of the game.

Quesen’s case is different from the others. Orenstein did what was recommended. The district judge didn’t overrule information or substitute judgment. It is like a prior act that shouldn’t be admissible.

But perhaps most germane, Orenstein has done nothing new to merit these calls.

Quesen’s appearance before Orenstein was months before Pichardo Cepeda’s case first drew attention. It was almost a year before Orenstein was removed from hearing arraignments. The calls for his ouster are asking to punish the district judge for breaking a rule that wasn’t a rule at the time.

Are there real reasons for the court system to keep a close eye on Orenstein’s courtroom so that new problems don’t arise? Absolutely.

But the politicians trying to use a tragedy to remove Orenstein from office are out of order.