Three-judge panel affirms Allentown's anti-bias ordinance.
Of The Morning Call
Commonwealth Court declared that Allentown had the legal authority in 2002 to broaden its anti-discrimination ordinance to include sexual orientation and gender identity.
The unanimous three-judge panel reversed the decision of a Lehigh County judge, who had struck down the newest anti-bias protections.
''Fantastic,'' said City Councilwoman Gail Hoover, a sponsor of the measure. ''What a great day.''
Though the appeals court focused on the Allentown ordinance, the ruling gives at least nine other local governments in Pennsylvania more confidence that their anti-bias ordinances are legal as well.
The ruling also could encourage other municipalities to adopt similar ordinances, if they had earlier reservations about whether such ordinances would survive court challenges.
''This is very positive,'' said Allentown resident Elizabeth Bradbury, publisher of The Valley Gay Press and a vice president of the Pennsylvania Diversity Network. ''This ordinance does a great deal to remind people that all people should be free from discrimination.''
The Allentown ordinance protects gays, lesbians and transsexuals from discrimination in housing, employment and public accommodations, which includes access to restaurants, hotels, parks and gymnasiums. The ordinance previously protected only categories such as race, national origin and disability.
Attorney Randall Wenger, who represents the four Allentown landlords who sued, said a decision has not been made whether to appeal to the state Supreme Court. His clients are Gerry Hartman, John Lapinski and Robert and Debbie Roycroft.
Wenger said the ruling puts his clients in a predicament because, by renting to gays, they could be promoting lifestyles that are objectionable to them.
''They can be stuck where their religious convictions conflict with their obligations under the ordinance,'' he said.
The 26-page opinion was written by Judge Renee Cohn Jubelirer, a former South Whitehall Township commissioner. She was joined by Judge Robert Simpson, a former Northampton County judge, and Senior Judge Joseph McCloskey.
The decision addressed, in part, whether municipalities have the legal authority to adopt anti-bias ordinances that go beyond the state's anti-bias laws. The state's Human Relations Act does not cover sexual orientation and gender identity.
Judge Alan Black had concluded that the city exceeded its legal authority under Pennsylvania law.
But the Commonwealth Court ruling said cities have broad latitude to adopt ordinances involving their ''police powers'' — their powers to protect the health, safety and welfare of their residents.
''A municipality's police power enables 'civil society' to respond in an appropriate and effective fashion to changing social, economic and political circumstances, and maintain its vitality and order,'' Cohn Jubelirer wrote.
She pointed out that the Commonwealth Court judges had the benefit of a state Supreme Court ruling, addressing a similar case, which was issued after Black filed his decision.
The Supreme Court ruling addressed Philadelphia ordinances that provide benefits for domestic partners of city employees and prohibit discrimination in other ways. Though the Supreme Court struck down some of the city's provisions, it affirmed a city's right to enact ordinances involving its ''police powers.''
That decision could be an indicator of how the state's highest court would rule if it receives the Allentown case.
''The tea leaves I read say the Supreme Court would uphold Allentown's right to do this as well,'' said lawyer Daniel Anders, representing the city. CONTINUED NEXT PAGE
08-12-05