A federal judge has given Gov. Tom Wolf until Friday to respond to a lawsuit filed by a group led by Butler County that claims his coronavirus business shutdown orders violate some constitutional rights.

U.S. District Judge William Stickman IV issued his order just days after granting an expedited hearing on some of the plaintiffs' claims.

Also in the order, Stickman set a declaratory judgment hearing for July 17.

The suit was filed May 7 in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania on behalf of Butler, Greene, Fayette and Washington counties, four Republican lawmakers and several small businesses.

In addition to the governor, state Secretary of Health Dr. Rachel Levine is named as the only other defendant.

The four counties in the complaint contend they have lost tax revenue due to the orders, and the public is prevented from attending their meetings.

The lawmakers say the orders limited their campaigning activities. For example, they are unable to make door-to-door visits or hold rallies.

The businesses, which were deemed “non-life sustaining” under the governor's orders, argue the designation was unfair and arbitrary, adding that Wolf's waiver process for the affected businesses did not provide for a hearing or appeal process.

Additionally, the suit claim's the state's three-phased, color-coded reopening plan is “arbitrary and irrational.”

The plaintiffs asked the court to rule the orders violated the First, Fifth and 14th amendments of the U.S. Constitution, and requested a permanent injunction barring the state from enforcing them.

Tom King, lead attorney for the plaintiffs, later filed a motion for a “speedy hearing — afforded under Rule 57 of federal law — in the declaratory judgment case.

Following oral arguments May 27 from King and his counterpart, Karen Romano, chief deputy attorney general, the judge granted the plaintiffs the expedited review on three of five claims raised in the lawsuit.

He ordered both sides to meet and gave them until Monday of this week to submit a report to the court on points of agreement and disagreement over matters of discovery, creation of a stipulated factual record and if an evidentiary hearing would be needed.

In the joint status report filing, King and Romano reached agreement on some issues, but not all. One sticking point was over the time frame for the declaratory judgment hearing.

The plaintiffs wanted a hearing in mid-June. The defendants pushed for mid-August.

Stickman's order seemed to split the difference, setting the hearing for July 17, and ordered discovery to begin June 12.

Both sides agreed all direct testimony will be given by way of written declarations and/or affidavits, which must be submitted to the court by July 9, along with stipulations of fact, a list of stipulated exhibits, and a list of witnesses.

“All witnesses will be available at the hearing for cross-examination,” according to Stickman's order, “unless the parties agree in writing by July 15 that a particular witness will not be subject to cross-examination.”

Pre-trial briefs, the order noted, will be limited to 20 pages and are due by July 9.