For years now, Americans in big blue cities have suffered under the scourge of radical left-wing prosecutors who believe that their job is to protect criminals rather than enforce the law. But a development in the City of Brotherly Love could be a sign that even liberal judges have had enough of the needless chaos and disorder.
In an extraordinary recent ruling, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court delivered a stunning rebuke to Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner after he effectively attempted to spring a convicted murderer from prison. In addition to assuming jurisdiction over the case to prevent a gross miscarriage of justice, the court – which has a 5-2 liberal majority – created a new check on Krasner’s power to challenge convictions. They specifically ruled that Philadelphia judges must notify the Pennsylvania Office of Attorney General and allow the office to intervene before granting relief in any case where Krasner attempts to overturn a conviction.
Under Pennsylvania law, criminals have opportunities to challenge their convictions, but typically the prosecutor’s office is expected to contest their appeal and defend the interests of victims and the broader community.
Yet Krasner has repeatedly failed to do so. The case in question here centered on Lavar Brown, a man who was convicted of murder twice, once in 2004 and once in 2005. When Brown sought relief under Pennsylvania’s Post Conviction Relief Act, Krasner “conceded relief,” meaning that he agreed that Brown was entitled to a new trial.
But as Pennsylvania Attorney General Dave Sunday, a Republican, noted, that concession “was not reliable, as it had failed to disclose material evidence, submitted a false stipulation, misrepresented facts, and opposed a required evidentiary hearing.”
This is hardly the first time that Krasner has neglected his duty, according to the scathing opinion authored by liberal Justice Kevin Dougherty. “Since 2018, the [district attorney’s office] has conceded relief well over 100 times, mostly in murder cases like this one,” Dougherty wrote. “There have been numerous instances of untrustworthy concessions, lack of candor, misrepresentations of fact, lack of adequate investigation, and avoidance of hearings.”
In one particularly egregious example, Krasner told the courts that a murder victim’s family opposed the conviction of the murderer.
This blew up spectacularly in his face when “it was later discovered that Krasner’s staff had consulted only one relative, who was not the couple’s surviving daughter,” according to law professor Jonathan Turley, who analyzed the ruling. The daughter wanted the murderer kept in prison and “Krasner was ordered to write apology letters to the family.”
The majority opinion further stated that “the problems are poised to continue” as “more than 1,000 cases” could be challenged in the near future.
Krasner’s clear political bias was also called out in the opinion. While prosecutors should “confess error,” the court wrote, that does not mean simply clearing the way for every conviction to be overturned for political reasons: “When relief is not dictated by the record and law but merely advocated for personal, political, ideological, policy, or other non-legal reasons, a prosecutor’s concession does not minister justice; it facilitates injustice.”
But as Turley writes, even such a stinging rebuke by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court is unlikely to compel Krasner to actually do his job of putting dangerous individuals behind bars. “Krasner feeds a rage addiction with uncut, pure criminal justice crack,” Turley wrote in The Hill. “It is a formula that has served him well with the media and the voters.”
Indeed, despite Krasner actively working to free convicted murderers and refusing to prosecute violent offenders, he has consistently won more than 70 percent of the vote in his heavily Democrat city.
Krasner first came into office in 2017 as part of a wave of prosecutors who were backed by leftist billionaire George Soros and his various nonprofits and allies.
Since then, he has established himself as an ally to the anti-police, anti-prison wing of the Democrat Party. As Turley also notes, the courts have previously admonished Krasner for “creating what amounted to an unconstitutional blacklist of police officers whom he would not call as witnesses” if they had been accused of misconduct.
The soft-on-crime approach harmed residents of Philadelphia, as murders, burglaries, and gun assaults surged in the years following his first election, as AMAC Newsline previously reported. Meanwhile, he has reserved most of his hatred for ICE agents removing violent illegal immigrants from the community, comparing them to Nazis and vowing to “hunt [them] down.”
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court is right for stepping in to stop Krasner’s brazen assault on public safety and the rule of law. And with a tough-on-crime Republican in the state attorney general’s office, Krasner will no longer have free rein to unleash violent offenders onto city streets by blocking evidence and obstructing the legal process.
Ultimately, however, it will be up to Philadelphia voters to hold Krasner accountable. Judges can only do so much, and so long as voters continue to reward Krasner with more time in office, their city will continue to suffer.
Matt Lamb is an AMAC Newsline contributor and associate editor for The College Fix. He previously worked for Students for Life of America, Students for Life Action, and Turning Point USA. He previously interned for Open the Books. His writing has also appeared in the Washington Examiner, The Federalist, LifeSiteNews, Human Life Review, Headline USA, and other outlets. The opinions expressed are his own. Follow him @mattlamb22 on X.
