Opinion ID: 2394663
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Count II: Section 1506 Jurisdiction

Text: In its analysis of Count II, the Majority again examines jurisdiction under Section 1506 and dismisses PEDP's petition for a writ of mandamus, interpreting Section 1506's jurisdictional grant as appellate rather than original. With this reasoning, the Majority seems to implicitly overrule the jurisdictional approach in PGCB v. City Council , and adopt Mr. Justice Saylor's view in dissent in that case, a view which I joined. [2] Given my joinder in Justice Saylor's dissent, I obviously believe today's decision is the better reading of the statute. In my view, the Majority fails to adequately square today's conclusions with the analysis in PGCB v. City Council . Nevertheless, I believe the Majority decision is correct. Today's sound conclusion indirectly overturns a decision that rested upon a shaky foundation the day it was decided.