Urging for non-political considerations, supporters advocate for the retention of Pennsylvania Supreme Court justices.
The upcoming retention election for judges Christine Donohue, Kevin Dougherty, and David Wecht is garnering significant attention, as the outcome could potentially jeopardize reproductive freedoms for millions of people in Pennsylvania.
These judges, who currently hold a 5-2 majority on the state Supreme Court, have made several impartial rulings in the past decade. Notable decisions include the tossing out of a GOP-designed congressional map in 2018 and decisions that defended pandemic lockdowns and expanded the scope of the commonwealth's mail-in voting law.
Shanin Specter, a University of Pennsylvania law professor, has argued that the judges deserve to retain their seats due to their impartial rulings and endorsement by the nonpartisan Pennsylvania Bar Association. Kadida Kenner, founder of the New Pennsylvania Project and co-chair of the state's chapter of Why Courts Matter, also supports the judges facing a retention vote due to their impartiality.
However, Republicans are aiming to oust these sitting judges who were elected as Democrats. Nicole Chung, regional campaigns director at Planned Parenthood Votes, described the Pennsylvania Supreme Court as the "last line of defense" for reproductive freedom in the state. If Donohue, Dougherty, and Wecht are removed, Gov. Josh Shapiro could appoint temporary replacements who would need Senate approval to serve until 2027.
The stakes are high, as a Republican majority on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court could prompt new legal challenges to abortion rights in the state. This is a concern expressed during a digital news conference held on Wednesday.
Republican activist Scott Presler and his group, Early Vote Action, have encouraged voters to vote "no" on retaining Donohue, Dougherty, and Wecht. As of last month, Early Vote Action has 28 paid workers running the campaign.
One voter rights activist hopes the judicial retention races will draw more people to the polls in a low-turnout municipal election cycle. It's worth noting that Pennsylvania is one of only seven states nationwide that vote in partisan judicial races.
Removing a Supreme Court judge through retention is rare; it happened once in 2005 due to an anti-incumbent wave. Judges on Pennsylvania's highest court serve 10-year terms and face voters in a retention election.
Both the New Pennsylvania Project and Why Courts Matter are progressive organizations that typically back Democratic candidates and their issues. Their support for the judges underscores the importance of these races in maintaining a balanced court.
As the election approaches, it's crucial for voters to be informed about the potential implications of their decisions. The outcome of this election could significantly impact reproductive rights and the balance of power on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.
Read also:
- Lu Shiow-yen's Challenging Position as Chair of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Under Scrutiny in Donovan's Analysis
- Contest Between Palmer and Frohnmaier: Expert Predicts No Clear Winner and a Flawed Structure
- Berlin's Roma-Sinti communities asserting their presence in German theatrical arenas
- "The concept of 'corporate feudalism' is not viable"
