Court Opinion

ID: 9650572
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 15:44:27.993578+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:12:23.569011
License: Public Domain

*142COLINS, Judge,
dissenting.
I dissent. The IRRC is not an arm of the legislature, but instead, is an independent body properly positioned in the executive branch of our government. Its function is to review and approve or disapprove regulations proposed by sister executive agencies. The authority granted to it is simply a logical extension of the delegation of rule-making power to executive agencies by the General Assembly.
Our Supreme Court in Commonwealth v. Sessoms, 516 Pa. 365, 532 A.2d 775 (1987), considered the paramount factor in ascertaining the nature of an agency to be the agency’s composition. The specific language of the Regulatory Review Act mandates that no member of the General Assembly or state government shall be appointed as a member of the IRRC. The power to initiate removal of any member lies solely with the Governor. A better guard against control over the members being weighted in favor of the General Assembly cannot seriously be argued. The majority states that the extraordinary power over removal possessed by the Governor does not transform the IRRC into an executive agency. Likewise, the fact that removal may only be effectuated by the consent of the Senate by a two-thirds vote of its members does not transform the IRRC into an arm of the legislature.
I would uphold the constitutionality of the Regulatory Review Act and deny the request to direct publication of the pertinent regulations.
PALLADINO, J., joins in this dissent.