For the first time since late July, Pennsylvania’s General Assembly is scheduled to reconvene next week in Harrisburg.

At the top of the agenda are the results of two state Supreme Court decisions: one determining that mandatory life sentences for felony murder are unconstitutional and another putting tens of thousands of slot machine-like gaming terminals at risk of seizure. 

Lawmakers failed to come to a consensus on the former before a court-imposed deadline passed, leaving prosecutors and judges with no guidance for sentencing those convicted of the crime. 

They also did not address the court’s determination in June that the “unlawful” skill games devices should be regulated just like other gambling machines. By betting on games of chance, players can win jackpots. Completing a complex puzzle gives them a chance to win back any losses. 

So, Pennsylvania State Police have warned that they will start enforcing the skill games decision across the commonwealth on Oct. 13, when the Supreme Court order halting their ruling takes effect unless the legislature acts. 

SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE

In a historically unproductive legislature, it’s unclear if lawmakers will be able to come up with a solution on either topic. Even bipartisan issues with the support of the Gov. Josh Shapiro — like a ban on cellphones in schools — haven’t progressed to his desk. 

Both chambers are scheduled to meet on Monday, Sept. 28, with six session days scheduled before the skill games’ deadline. 

Skill Games

The General Assembly has wrestled with how to regulate skill games for years, including whether they should be banned entirely or taxed as a new source of revenue. 

Pennsylvanians may find terminals everywhere from restaurants and social clubs to gas stations, laundromats and grocery stores — proliferating far beyond the traditional confines of other gaming devices.

Proponents have long claimed that the games shouldn’t be regulated like other gambling devices because they require an element of skill and don’t solely rely on luck — though some players seem to be unaware of the memory game that allows them to recoup their losses. 

But justices didn’t seem swayed by their arguments, determining in June that the “unlawful” devices should be regulated just like other gambling machines. 

Skill games decision in Pa. could ban arcade games without legislative regulation

Pace-O-Matic, the Georgia-based company that produces the software, reports that more than 10,000 small businesses and fraternal clubs have terminals, many of which rely on them as a significant source of income.

The Supreme Court’s ruling found that the devices weren’t unique, making them subject to the regulations of the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board. Under state law, only licensed casinos and qualifying “truck stop establishments” may legally possess and operate approved PGCB machines, according to state police. 

“All ‘skill games’ devices/slot machines located outside of PGCB-licensed businesses are unlawful and all establishments possessing, operating and/or maintaining such machines are subject to criminal prosecution and immediate seizure of the machines as of Oct. 14, 2026,” warned troopers last Thursday. 

Powering off, unplugging or making the machines otherwise inoperate “is not sufficient,” the press release continued. If distributors or vendors aren’t willing to remove the machines prior to the deadline, PSP said it will assist. 

Past proposals have explored a range of options, and a recent co-sponsorship memo from Rep. Brad Roae (R-Crawford) would give lawmakers another six months to identify a solution. Casinos support a comparable rate to their 55% tax, though Senate leaders endorsed a plan last year at 35%. 

Another effort would impose a monthly fee of $500, the favored outcome for the industry. Funds could be used to offset property taxes or pay for transit — the latter of which was a major point of contention in the 2025 budget cycle and promises to be a sticking point again in 2027.

Felony murder

Also known as second-degree murder, the charge of felony murder is used when someone is killed during the commission of another felony, such as robbery or burglary, even if the death was unintentional. 

In the months since legislators departed, Republicans in both chambers have hammered their colleagues online and in policy committee meetings, pinning the legislative failure on their Democratic counterparts. 

This past Thursday, GOP House members met in Lancaster, where a prosecutor and retired judge spoke about “unpredictability and chaos” in the state’s county-level judicial system, urging lawmakers to adopt Senate Bill 1400.

“I think that it would provide very clear guideposts to allow everyone to have an informed discussion about the potential outcomes” of legal cases, said Travis Anderson, an assistant district attorney in Lancaster County. “And allow everybody to feel the same certainty that we want them to feel when we go through this criminal justice process.” 

Anderson and David Ashworth, who retired as a judge in the Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas in January, said the proposal allowed courts to factor in individual circumstances when sentencing, the key contention in the Supreme Court’s decision to strike down mandatory life sentences. 

The charge covers a wide range of culpability, including an armed robber who killed another to the “lookout two miles away,” Ashworth added, but everyone got the same sentence. 

SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX.

“The one-size-fits-all or the cookie-cutter type of guidelines or legislation simply don’t work in the real world,” he continued. 

Senate Bill 1400 establishes a 35-year minimum with limited exceptions and still allows judges to impose sentences for life without parole. This means that the parole board will handle decisions about releasing the 1,100-plus prisoners who’ve served decades with a now-unconstitutional life sentence, and gives local judicial officials criteria for future sentencing. 

In contrast, Ashworth said House Bill 1042 “doesn’t provide the structure that we as judges prefer,” with a 30-year minimum sentence for those currently serving, punting the question about future decisions to the Commission on Sentencing. 

Who’s serving felony murder sentences in Pennsylvania prisons?

“It just leaves too many things up in the air,” said Ashworth, who added that the House version does incentivize good behavior by allowing some to serve shorter sentences. 

Both asked lawmakers not to kick resentencing decisions back to counties, pulling on their experiences with “juvenile lifers” over a decade ago. 

A 2012 decision from the U.S. Supreme Court that struck down life sentences for those convicted as minors. Since that time, Pennsylvania has resentenced 501 of the 523 prisoners incarcerated since their youth. 

Anderson said he worked on one case that was 40 years old, a long enough time that evidence had degraded and witness memories had faded — making it difficult to evaluate. 

“I can tell you that the uncertainty and procedural unpredictability of those resentencing hearings re-traumatized many of the surviving family members of the victims,” said Anderson. “The murder, the trial and the sentencing and everything had taken place before I was born. But in that case, the family was still around and they still had very, very, very strong feelings about what had taken place.”

Those resentenced had to petition the parole board anyway, he added, who “make these decisions all the time” and have a process to involve victims and families. 

Rep. David Rowe (R-Union), who chairs the House Republican Policy Committee, concluded Thursday’s meeting by acknowledging the uncertainty for those families, many of whom had thought their judicial proceedings had been resolved decades ago.  

“The Pennsylvania Supreme Court requires individualized consideration of culpability, it does not require Pennsylvania to abandon accountability, uniformity or serious consequences for serious crimes,” said Rowe. “Now it’s our job to provide the clarity that Pennsylvania needs.”