Pennsylvania Supreme Court Says It’s Unconstitutional For Gas Companies to Frack Wherever They Want | Alternet

Some major parts of Pennsylvania’s two-year-old Marcellus Shale drilling law are unconstitutional, the state’s Supreme Court decided Thursday.

As the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reports, the court voted 4 – 2 that a provision that allowing natural gas companies to drill anywhere, regardless of local zoning laws, was unconstitutional. Seven municipalities had challenged the shale drilling law, known as Act 13, that required “drilling, waste pits and pipelines be allowed in every zoning district, including residential districts, as long as certain buffers are observed.”

WTF!! a “physician gag order”

,,,challenges by Pennsylvania citizens and townships on provisions in the law that prohibit doctors from telling patients about health impacts related to fracking chemicals were sent back to Commonwealth Court for reevaluation. The “physician gag order” (or “ frack gag“) was recently challenged by a doctor who claimed it infringed on his First Amendment rights and his duties as a doctor, but his challenge was thrown out by a Pennsylvania court in October,,,

Pennsylvania Supreme Court Says It’s Unconstitutional For Gas Companies to Frack Wherever They Want | Alternet

See also:

The Basics about Pennsylvania’s Act 13

Gags physicians treating patients exposed to chemicals that are claimed as a trade secret or confidential proprietary information by prohibiting health professionals from disclosing the information provided to the professional by a vendor, service provider or operator. Further, a written statement of need and a confidentiality agreement is to be provided by the health professional “as soon as circumstances permit. (p. 3)

Pennsylvania Act 13 - Pa. HB1950

Another area of serious contention regards the restrictions placed on Pennsylvania health care professionals. It violates some of the basic tenets Pennsylvania doctors are sworn to uphold regarding public health. Pennsylvania doctors have been 'gagged' by the legislation when it comes to sharing critical information, as pointed out in this legal opinion:

“Health professionals who are authorized to share Secret Information are likely to be responsible for ensuring that all persons receiving the information understand that it may not be communicated to anyone (except, perhaps, regulatory officials) not involved in the patient’s diagnosis and treatment. In a medical emergency, the health professional thus must ensure that a patient receiving life-saving Secret Information understands that the information may not be disclosed to others who may be at risk, including family members. If the Secret Information is released by persons who learned it from a health professional, and the health professional cannot prove that he or she exercised reasonable care to prevent those persons from divulging the information, the professional could be liable for damages resulting from the disclosure.”

Excerpt from May 2012 opinion by EarthJustice