No. 25-6901October Term 2025Dismissed
Michael Baloga, Petitioner v. Brian D. Jacisin, et al.
from the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania.
Case status
- Current stage
- Dismissed
- Latest event
- Dismissed
- Decision timing
- No window until argument is scheduled.
- What it's about
from the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania.
Question presented
1. Whether the Pennsylvania court’s application of Sovereign immunity conflicts with the Fourteenth amendment and Federal Constitutional Protections or U.S. Supreme Court Precedent? 2. Whether the Petitioner (Plaintiff) was deprived due process covered under the Fourteenth Amendment when State investigative employees falsified witness testimony in an official proceeding and both Court of Common pleas and Commonwealth Court said it was within the scope of their duties? 3. Whether Pennsylvania Sovereign immunity doctrine as applied in this case by lower Courts conflicts with the Fourteenth. Fifth and First Amendment of the Federal law? 4. Whether the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment permits state officials to invoke sovereign or official immunity to shield themselves from liability for falsifying under oath taped witness testimony in an official investigation?
- Case path
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania / Dismissed
- Area
First Amendment
Briefing
What it's about
Michael Baloga has asked the Supreme Court to review Pennsylvania court decisions that applied sovereign immunity (a rule that can block suits against the state and its workers) to his case. He argues that using immunity to shield state investigative employees accused of falsifying witness testimony violated his due process (fair legal treatment) and other federal constitutional rights.
Argument
The case is at the petition stage, and no oral argument is scheduled. No substantive justice or advocate reactions are available yet.
Impact
The case could affect whether people can pursue federal constitutional claims when state employees are accused of misconduct during an investigation. For example, someone who says officials falsified witness testimony could see a case thrown out early if immunity applies.
What is Michael Baloga v. Brian D. Jacisin about?
Baloga says Pennsylvania courts wrongly used sovereign immunity, a rule that can block suits against state workers, to stop his federal claims. He says investigators falsified witness testimony during an official proceeding.
Who could be affected if the Court takes Baloga v. Jacisin?
People suing state employees over alleged investigative misconduct could be affected, especially if immunity rules can end cases before a full hearing. The case could also shape what remedies are available when someone claims state officials violated basic constitutional protections.
What happens next in Baloga v. Jacisin?
The justices will decide whether to hear the case. No oral argument is scheduled yet, and the next public sign would be a scheduling move or an order on whether to hear it.
Related cases
Grounding
- Grounding
- Primary materials plus reporting.
- Note
- Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.
- Checked
- Jul 23, 2026
- Method
- Methodology