1 Pennsylvania Environmental Defense Foundation v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania: Recognition of Environmental Rights for Pennsylvania Citizens John C. Dernbach, * Kenneth T. Kristl, ‡ James R. May † INTRODUCTION In 2013, in Robinson Township v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 1 the Pennsylvania Supreme Court held unconstitutional major parts of Pennsylvania’s Act 13—a 2012 oil and gas law designed to facilitate the development of natural gas from Marcellus Shale. 2 A plurality of the court based its decision on the text of Article I, Section 27 of Pennsylvania’s constitution, 3 the state’s ‘Environmental Rights Amendment,’ a then-near-dormant provision that had never been used, even by a plurality, to justify holding a statute unconstitutional. In an earlier article in these pages we placed Robinson Township into context by considering its implications going forward, including at the local, state, and global levels in general, and in the context of environmental constitutionalism in particular. 4 While the Section 27 rationale did not command a majority of the supreme court, the case nonetheless received widespread attention because of its implications. 5 * John Dernbach is Commonwealth Professor of Environmental Law and Sustainability at Widener University, Commonwealth Law School, and Director of its Environmental Law and Sustainability Center. He can be reached at jcdernbach@widener.edu. ‡ Ken Kristl is a Professor of Law at Widener University, Delaware Law School, Director of its Environmental and Natural Resources Law Clinic, and co-Director of its Environmental Rights Institute. He can be reached at ktkristl@widener.edu. † Jim May is a Distinguished Professor of Law at Widener University, Delaware Law School, and co-Director of its Environmental Rights Institute. He can be reached at jrmay@widener.edu. 1 83 A.3d 901, 999–1000 (Pa. 2013). 2 Oil and Gas Act, 58 PA. CONS. STAT. ANN. §§ 2301–3504 (West 2014). 3 PA. CONST. art. I, § 27. 4 John C. Dernbach, James R. May, & Kenneth T. Kristl, Robinson Township v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania: Examination and Implications, 67 RUTGERS L. REV. 1169 (2015). 5 See, e.g., Kenneth T. Kristl, The Devil is in the Details: Articulating Practical Principles for Implementing the Duties in Pennsylvania’s Environmental Rights Amendment , 28 Geo. Envtl. L. Rev 589 (2016); Erin Daly & James R. May, Robinson Township: A Model for Environmental Constitutionalism, 21 Widener L. Rev. 151 (2015); John C. Dernbach, The Potential Meanings of a Constitutional Public Trust , 45 Envtl. L. 463 (2015) (hereinafter, “Dernbach, Constitutional Trust”); Elizabeth F. Valentine, Arguments in Support of a Constitutional Right to Atmospheric Integrity, 32 Pace Envtl. L. Rev. 56 (2015); Joshua P. Fershee, Facts, Fiction, and Perception in Hydraulic Fracturing: Illuminating Act 13 and Robinson Township v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania , 116 W. Va. L. Rev.819 (2014).