Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comments Constitutional Notice topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Civil rights advocates tell Chester County commissioners they will pursue litigation over alleged unconstitutional charging practices
Summary
Two public commenters told the commissioners they are providing notice of planned litigation and said thousands of local criminal charges were brought unconstitutionally. They cited the U.S. Constitution and federal statutes during public comment.
During the public comment period at the Aug. 13 Chester County Board of Commissioners meeting, civil rights advocates Jessica Saxton and Tanner Woodowning told the board they were providing formal notice that many people have been charged and detained under procedures they say conflict with the U.S. Constitution.
Saxton identified herself as a civil rights advocate and litigator and told commissioners she was providing notice under federal rules and the Constitution. She said Pennsylvania permits charging by information rather than grand-jury indictment in some cases and called that practice unconstitutional; she asked county officials to direct public officials to act consistently with the U.S. Constitution and said she would place a notice on the record.
Tanner Woodowning said he represents victims and has compiled criminal affidavits alleging unconstitutional charges in the state, including “many” from within Chester County. He told the board he has approximately 4,600 criminal affidavits and warned that, absent resolution, he intends to convert affidavits into criminal complaints. Woodowning cited federal statutes described in the meeting as “Title 18 subsection 242” (deprivation of rights under color of law) and “Title 18 subsection 2.1” (described in the record as conspiracy to deprive civil rights), saying the allegations could form the basis for criminal complaints if not addressed.
Commissioner Maxwell acknowledged receipt of documentation and instructed the meeting attorney to collect materials placed with the record. The board did not take action on the matters raised during public comment; these statements were part of the public-comment record and not a formal legal filing presented to the board during the meeting.
