In December, I blogged the tax issues faced by Pennsylvania Superior Court Judge Joan Orie Melvin, who was attempting to refuse an $11,000 annual pay raise (from $150,900 to $162,100) approved by the state legislature.  The post concluded that even if Judge Melvin succeeded in turning her back on the pay raise, she would be required under the constructive receipt doctrine to include it in her income.  As a result, she would be better off to accept the pay raise and then donating it to charity, so that the charitable deduction would offset the extra income.

Last week, in a remarkable 9-page opinion (Melvin v. Casey, No. 550 M.D. 2006 (2/15/07)), the Commonwealth Court ruled that the Pennsylvania Constitution prevented Judge Melvin from turning down the pay raise:

Petitioner raises questions concerning whether Petitioner has a substantive due process right to refuse an increase to her compensation; and forcing Petitioner to accept the pay raise violates her equal protection rights or her First Amendment rights. … Petitioner’s assertions of a substantive due process right and a violation of her right to equal protection as well as an abridgement of her first amendment rights are just that, assertions without any legal authority. …

Petitioner may proselytize ad infinitum against the level of judicial salaries during her retention campaign. … However as a judge she should not be filing specious complaints in judicial forums. Petitioner is free to donate all of her pay increase to charities of her choice. However as a judicial officer she is not free to ignore the Pennsylvania Constitution so as to create a two tiered system of judicial compensation.

Press coverage:

• Associated Press (2/16/07)
• Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (2/17/07)
• Pittsburgh Tribune-Review (2/16/07)

(Hat Tip:  Howard Bashman.)