WHY PA LAWSUIT MAY BE A WINNER

On point two, state court precedent holds that laches only applies to procedural, not substantive challenges. A case the state supreme court cited in its recent dismissal, Stilp v. Hafer, holds that "the doctrine may not be used to defeat a constitutional challenge to a statute." In other words, while laches can bar challenges to the procedure by which a statute was passed, it cannot be used to bar constitutional challenges to the substance of a statute — and in Kelly's current case, we have a constitutional challenge to the substance of Act 77.

https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/understanding-mike-kellys-pa-lawsuit?fbclid=IwAR3S8YJnxb4nT-Pj82d-2d1jEc6X1If66lzO0qdrDFNFxM8Hv9vj7-Z4oPo