Accountable Law Enforcement

Constables are democratically-elected officials, answering directly to voters. Their community foundation fosters transparency, reducing misconduct common in centralized, bureaucratic law enforcement agencies. Independent from rigid hierarchies, political agendas, and special interests, constables avoid the bureaucratic shielding that can obscure accountability and lead to distrust of law enforcement. Constables are a direct, visible, and responsive link between the public and justice.

What Constables Do for Your Community

Carry out court orders

When a court issues an order, constables help make sure it is carried out in the real world. That means the justice system does not stop at paperwork when families, tenants, small businesses, or victims need action.

Deliver important legal notices

Constables serve civil papers so people receive official notice that affects their rights, property, or obligations. For residents, that protects fairness: you should know when the legal system requires your attention.

Transport people safely and securely

Constables transport prisoners for the courts when safety, reliability, and chain of custody matter. This helps keep hearings moving and relieves pressure on already stretched local agencies.

Protect polling places on Election Day

Constables are the only law enforcement officers permitted inside polling places on Election Day. Their presence helps keep the peace close to the ballot box while preserving voter confidence and local accountability.

Fill the gaps other agencies cannot

In rural areas and underserved parts of the Commonwealth, constables often provide coverage where larger departments are farther away or focused elsewhere. That local presence matters when distance, time, and limited resources can leave communities exposed.

Answer to the people they serve

Constables are elected by the communities they protect, not appointed from above. If residents believe a constable is doing well or falling short, they have a direct voice at the ballot box.

~1,800 Active constables serving Pennsylvania
67 Counties connected by constable coverage
100,000s Court papers and processes handled each year
Only one Law enforcement role permitted inside polling places on Election Day
Since 1664 The original authority Pennsylvania law enforcement was built from

Rooted in Our Community

Elected at the township, borough, or ward level, constables are deeply connected to the local area, serving as familiar faces who understand the community's unique needs. Constables strengthen the community through partnerships, collaboration, and active involvement. Their position as accessible, grassroots officers allows constables to bridge divides and strengthen social bonds in ways that larger, centralized law enforcement entities cannot. Constables serve as peacekeepers, a role that extends beyond enforcement to resolving conflicts within the community. They prevent disputes from escalating and help maintain social cohesion. As elected officials, constables embody a form of governance that reflects the people they serve. This democratic connection encourages residents to see them as allies rather than adversaries, fostering a collaborative spirit across cultural, economic, or generational lines. Constables uphold public safety in a way that aligns with local norms and values, rather than enforcing detached, centralized policies. This alignment unites residents around a common vision of their community's well-being.

Ensuring Your Safety and Rights

Constables are committed to keeping the community safe from crime. They are also a bulwark in the system of checks and balances against corruption and overreach by state and federal governments. Constables, as locally elected officials, are not beholden to the political or financial incentives of a distant centralized authority, but remain accountable to the residents of their jurisdiction, giving citizens a direct voice in law enforcement and governance. By maintaining independence from centralized bureaucratic structures, constables can resist pressures or directives that might conflict with the interests of their community, thereby keeping centralized agendas from infiltrating local governance. By remaining outside of the control of centralized government, constables act as a check on systemic corruption within those institutions. With their roots in common law traditions, constables embody a legacy of protecting individual liberties and property rights against arbitrary government action, ensuring that power remains distributed and responsive to local needs rather than concentrated in elite hands.

Dedicated to Service

Constables' commitment to prioritizing the well-being of residents over mere enforcement is rooted in a tradition of acting as local guardians who address a wide range of civic needs. Unlike many modern law enforcement officers who focus primarily on crime suppression and prosecution, constables perform diverse tasks that directly support community life. Their duties include civil, judicial, and public safety functions, reflecting a holistic commitment to residents' needs and the civic systems that underpin community life. By acting as officers of the court and aides to local government, they ensure these institutions function effectively. Beyond their formal duties, constables often engage in voluntary efforts — such as mentoring, charity events, or teaching safety classes. In today's world, where policing can sometimes feel detached or militarized, constables stand out for their local, service-driven approach. Their independence from large bureaucracies allows them to focus on what locals need most rather than chasing centralized metrics like arrest numbers. This adaptability ensures they remain dedicated to serving people, not just systems.

Challenges to Local Accountability

Constables are not facing a single dispute or a temporary policy disagreement. Across litigation, rulemaking, and administrative practice, the office is being narrowed in ways that raise serious questions about executive-branch encroachment on powers the General Assembly chose to grant.

Prosecution for Authorized Duties

Constable Steven Ahmad Wiggs was in a marked police cruiser, in uniform, performing an official law enforcement duty he is authorized by statute to perform. State police prosecuted him for it. In Philadelphia, every charge against Wiggs was dismissed, quashed, or resulted in a not-guilty verdict. A separate constable, Douglas Filson, was tried de novo on summary appeal and found Not Guilty in Montgomery County in November 2023.

A lights case in Perry County reached the Pennsylvania Superior Court. A 2-1 panel decision in February 2025 affirmed a conviction; the dissenting judge noted plainly that a legislature authorizing constables to direct traffic cannot deny them the emergency lights that allow motorists to recognize that authority. The full Superior Court has granted en banc reargument; the matter is pending and the panel decision is not final.

Administrative Obstruction

Beyond prosecution, state agencies erect barriers to constable operations. State Police have repeatedly denied constables Originating Agency Identifier (ORI) numbers — the federal identifier required to file criminal complaints electronically — citing supervision and accountability concerns the legislature's own 2014 LBFC report characterized as policy disputes rather than statutory disqualifications. Agencies issue policy documents arguing constables lack "police officer" status for operational purposes, ignoring a clear statutory pattern that places constables on functional parity with police officers for core law enforcement duties (75 Pa.C.S. §§ 102 and 3102; 18 Pa.C.S. § 501; 11 Pa.C.S. § 12005; 16 Pa.C.S. § 14340).

The Cost

Unwarranted charges cost constables thousands of dollars in legal defense and cost Pennsylvania taxpayers thousands more in prosecution costs — all for charges that are ultimately dismissed or result in acquittals. Beyond money, this pattern undermines voter trust. When state agencies prosecute constables for doing exactly what the legislature authorized, residents lose a layer of locally elected accountability they cannot easily replace.

The Pennsylvania Superior Court has ruled that executive agencies cannot diminish powers granted by statute or common law to independently elected officials. The pressure on the office continues through courts and rulemaking bodies rather than through the General Assembly — a venue where the substance of these disputes can be examined openly.

Read the full record on the Issues page

The question is straightforward: should decisions about a locally elected office be made openly through the legislature, or narrowed indirectly through litigation, rulemaking, and administrative practice? Start with the practical step, then review the background.

Take Action Learn More