Pennsylvania AG Kathleen Kane Targeted for Impeachment for Refusing to Defend Gay Marriage Ban


Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane, who in July announced "I cannot ethically defend the constitutionality of Pennsylvania's (law banning same-sex marriage), where I believe it to be wholly unconstitutional", is now being targeted for impeachment by Republicans, Right Wing Watch reports:

MetcalfeA Republican state representative in Pennsylvania is circulating a memo calling for the impeachment of the state’s attorney general, Kathleen Kane, for her “misbehavior in office” and “violation of her constitutional, statutory, and ethical duties.” Earlier, a Republican state senator also called for her impeachment and asked the legislature to reduce her office’s budget…

…The state representative proposing impeachment, Daryl Metcalfe, recently stopped an openly gay colleague from speaking in favor of marriage equality on the state house floor after the Supreme Court’s recent rulings on marriage, saying his colleague was in “rebellion against God’s law.” Metcalfe even opposed a resolution condemning domestic violence because he feared it would advance the “homosexual agenda.”

Said Metcalfe in his memo: "It is our duty to stop her from engaging in further misbehavior in office."

Read the full memo at Right Wing Watch.


  1. Lindoro Almaviva says

    Where is our side? Where is the drive to impeach this a-hole? I think if he is going to bully someone, he should experience first hand how it feels.

  2. One of the CA 36,000+ says

    @Lindoro: You have to understand something– Pennsylvania is maddeningly conservative and provincial in many matters, especially outside the big cities. Citizens often say that Pennsylvania is “Pittsburgh in the west, Philadelphia in the east and Alabama everywhere in-between”. Not for nothing do many wags call it Pennsyltucky.

    There is a deep, stubborn, insane vein of fundamentalist religiosity found in many Pennsylvanians. And not just Protestant cultists, but Catholic cultists as well. And these cultists are just not intellectually equipped to handle a world view that isn’t pounded into their thick skulls by their priests/ministers/rabbis/imams. It’s going to take time to combat this stupidity.

  3. Sherry says

    Yeah, who knew it is wrong to ask an ELECTED official to do her job regardless of her political leanings. She is right it is unconstitutional, but her job is to defend laws passed.

  4. Daniel Berry, NYC says

    I imagine this decision on her part is backed up by lots of precedent.. Remember DOJ came to a point where it determined it would no longer enforce–was it DADT? I doubt if this type of issue is, by any means, the first to generate this kind of activity.

  5. Jack M says

    “Further misbehavior” means “doesn’t agree with me.”

    Also, it is shamefully patronizing to accuse a professional woman of misbehavior. I’ll bet if she were a man, another word would be used that was more respectful.

  6. says

    Kane has the right as AG to decide which cases have merit to defend. If she decides not to defend any particular case the Governor has the ability to step in. Which is what happened with marriage equality. She believes that the anti-gay marriage law violates the PA constitution and the US Constitution and sees no merit in pursuing the case.

    Metcalfe is a fundamentalist whackjob. In his world no one is allowed to have an opinion that differs from his. In another political climate he would face censure.

    Kane’s stance ….

  7. Clayton says

    Two points:

    1) An Attorney General has a certain amount of discretion regarding whether to prosecute or defend a case based upon his or her professional opinion of its merits.

    2) An Attorney General is elected to practice within the realm of state law, not God’s law. Metcalf is confusing the office of Attorney General with the priesthood.

  8. says

    Says the religious wingnut who inappropriately brings “God’s Law” into goverment, where it has no place. Impeach him.

    Her response to his threat, which is very unlikely to succeed, minces no words. But, hey, wasting state money for a lost cause never bothers the homophobic zealots.

  9. Ben in Oakland says

    You should be careful of what you wish for.

    suppose Kane did defend the law, but did it in such a way as to make sure that the bigots lose. They couldn’t impeach her for it.

  10. Howard says

    @Sherry, if she is right that it is unconstitutional, then she has an obligation NOT to defend that law. Don’t confuse defending a law with enforcing a law.

    Here in CA, the state officials refused to defend Prop 8 in court because it was unconstitutional, but Prop 8 was enforced by all state officials until it got overturned by SCOTUS.

  11. oncemorewithfeeling says

    To anyone thinking the AG doesn’t know how to do her job: I guarantee you she knows her job better than you do.

    Also: if you’re agreeing with moronic lunatic hateful Republican bigots, you can take for granted that you’re wrong.

    Also: the sky is blue.

  12. I wont grow up says

    As a resident of Pennsylvania and a gay conservative (I know its an oxymoron), I have to say Metcalf is wasting his time and only playing to his constituency, he won’t succeed. As my dad used to say “That dog just won’t hunt”.

  13. Bill says

    @Sherry: an AG just about never appears in court as all the legal work is delegated to staff, which the AG has to manage. Managing it means setting priorities and controlling costs. You don’t keep costs down by trying cases that you know you are 100% certain to lose.

  14. Jere says

    Sherry, Kane’s job isn’t to defend laws that are passed, but rather to defend Pennsylvania’s Constitution. She believes this law to be unconstitutional, so she cannot both do her job and defend this law.

  15. AdamTh says

    “… saying his colleague was in “rebellion against God’s law.” ”

    I would expect to read about something like this in Alabama or MS, but not PA.

  16. walter says

    metcalf needs to remember he can quotes god’s law anywhere he wants except in the halls of government where the constitution is the law. never realized pennsylvania had so many douchebags

  17. Harry says

    I have been a life long resident of Pennsylvania. Is it ethical to ask the legislature to cut funding to the office of the Attorney General of the State of Pennsylvania? No, it unethical! This man shouldn’t be attempting to cut the budget of the AG office because it does a major disservice to the state and it’s citizen’s simply for political reasons. Shame on Mr. Metcalfe!

  18. RexT says

    This would be ‘shocking’ were it not typical of the GOP and how they deal those who offend their ‘gods’ law. Amazing how many fools actually consider the AG doing her job, quite within the law, is somehow failing. She’s an outstanding Attorney General and PA is very fortunate to have her in this position.

Leave A Reply