Three state Supreme Court justices are on the ballot in Pennsylvania next month in a typically under-the-radar vote that could have far-reaching implications in the critical battleground state.
The justices — Christine Donohue, Kevin Dougherty and David Wecht, who are all backed by Democratic Party — are facing an up-or-down “retention” election, meaning voters choose whether to keep them on the court for another 10 years.
Few Pennsylvania justices have lost their jobs in this way. But with Democrats’ 5-2 Supreme Court majority at stake ahead of the 2026 and 2028 elections, this year’s retention vote is drawing big money and attention. If all three justices were to lose, Pennsylvania’s high court could be deadlocked 2-2 through the end of 2027.
“This is without question the most important retention election in Pennsylvania history,” said Eugene DePasquale, chair of the Pennsylvania Democratic Party. “Reproductive freedom, free and fair elections, quality education, and a clean environment — they are all in the ballot.”
Here’s how a retention race works: Pennsylvanians cast a “yes” or “no” vote for each justice, who is listed without a party affiliation. If voters choose not to retain any or all of the justices, the state’s Democratic governor and two-thirds of the Republican-controlled state Senate would need to agree on temporary appointments until new justices are elected in 2027. But if they can’t agree, any open seat would remain vacant until the first Monday of January 2028.
Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court has decided several big cases in recent years, particularly on elections in the crucial swing state. The Democratic-controlled court struck down a gerrymandered congressional map in 2018 and upheld a mail voting law four years later. Last year, Democratic justices overturned a precedent upholding Medicaid’s ban on covering abortions.
Now, national Democrats are warning that a hamstrung Supreme Court could leave a lower court deciding major election cases in next year’s midterms.
Malcolm Kenyatta, vice chairman of the Democratic National Committee, said that “the Republican plan here is to put the Supreme Court in a position where it cannot function, and then have the backstop of a much more conservative Commonwealth Court that will ultimately be the final say as we go into the midterm elections.”
A new Franklin & Marshall poll found that all three justices have double-digit leads among likely voters, but that huge chunks of the electorate are undecided.
Groups on both sides have already spent nearly $5 million on ads ahead of the Nov. 4 election, according to data from AdImpact, a political ad-tracking firm. The “yes” campaign — led by state and national Democrats — has spent double compared to those advocating against the justices’ retention, and have already planned $1.2 million more. DePasquale said he predicts the spending on both sides will top $10 million — far and away more than in past years.
Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, who is up for re-election next year and is viewed as a potential 2028 Democratic presidential contender, appeared in an ad this week on behalf of the “yes” campaign.
“Here in Pennsylvania, the threats to our freedoms are very real,” Shapiro says in the ad. That’s why we need to keep our state Supreme Court standing for what’s right.”
The justices have been campaigning around the state and are featured in a joint television ad out late last month.
“We protected access to abortion. And your right to vote. Even when the powerful came after it,” the three justices said in the ad.
The rhetoric is cautious, as they seek not to suggest how they will rule on future issues.
“They are constrained by judicial ethics, so we have to do a lot of this for them,” DePasquale said.
Meanwhile, the Republican State Leadership Committee and conservative groups tied to billionaire businessman Jeffrey Yass’ Commonwealth Partners have been advertising in support of “no” votes.
“Defend democracy,” said a digital ad paid for by one such PAC called Citizens for Term Limits, dabbling in the kind of messaging Democrats have employed in recent years. “This fall, it’s time to term-limit the partisan Supreme Court. Vote no, no, no.”
One digital ad that aired last month from the RSLC urged voters to request their mail ballots and vote “no.”
“In 2024, we voted by mail and flipped Pennsylvania red. This year radical liberal judges are trying to secure another decade of power, we need you to stop them,” the ad says, referring to Republican victories in the presidential and Senate contests in Pennsylvania last year. “Show up again. Vote NO in November. Request your ballot at NOinNovember.com.”
A mailer from another Yass-funded group made headlines last month for criticizing the justices on redistricting, with a photo of the congressional map the court had throw out, because Republicans had gerrymandered it in violation of state laws. (After state lawmakers were unable to agree on a replacement map, courts implemented a map drawn by an outside expert.)
The RSLC, Jeffrey Yass and Commonwealth Partners did not respond to requests for comment.
Christopher Nicholas, a veteran Republican consultant in the state, said the political dynamics make this year an election without precedent. He also noted that more Republicans are registered in the state than there were during the justices’ 2015 election, which could give the “no” campaign a boost.
“It’s rare for any justice not to be retained,” he said. But “we’ve never had an organized and funded vote no effort here.”
