Lancaster County and five of its officials have filed a motion to dismiss a lawsuit brought by Michael Miller, a former candidate for Pennsylvania State Senate. The lawsuit alleges constitutional violations stemming from the County’s handling of election records and practices during the 2022 primary election. Miller claims that County officials improperly denied him access to public records and retaliated against him for pursuing his rights under Pennsylvania’s Right-to-Know Law (RTKL).

In their motion, the County argues that Miller’s claims should be dismissed because they have already been addressed in prior cases and are procedurally barred. They also assert that the defendants, as government officials, are protected by qualified immunity from personal liability. Furthermore, the County is seeking an order to prohibit Miller from filing further lawsuits against them without prior court approval.

However, the County’s motion has drawn scrutiny for its lack of engagement with key allegations in Miller’s complaint. Critics have noted the following deficiencies in the County’s filing:

 • Generalized Arguments: The motion fails to address the specific actions of each defendant, instead lumping them together without individualized defenses or analysis.

 • Failure to Address Constitutional Challenges: The motion does not engage with Miller’s constitutional challenge to Pennsylvania’s RTKL, a central issue in the lawsuit.

 • Lack of Substantive Responses: The County relies heavily on procedural arguments, such as claims of res judicata and qualified immunity, while avoiding a direct response to the detailed factual allegations in Miller’s complaint.

 • Improper Request for Injunction: The motion seeks to restrict Miller’s access to the courts by requiring him to obtain court approval before filing future lawsuits, without providing evidence of frivolous or abusive litigation.

The court has not yet ruled on the County’s motion. The case raises broader questions about access to public records, election transparency, and the balance between procedural defenses and accountability in government actions.