Three liberal justices in Pennsylvania have won 10-year terms, ensuring that Democrats retain their 5-2 majority on the state’s Supreme Court. This victory is critical in one of the nation’s key swing states, where court decisions can shape policies on voting rights, elections, and abortion.
The justices — Christine Donohue, Kevin Dougherty, and David Wecht — were first elected in 2015 as Democrats. They faced retention votes, a process in Pennsylvania where judges initially elected in partisan contests must be approved by voters every decade. Technically, these retention contests are nonpartisan, but they have significant political implications, especially in battleground states like Pennsylvania.
Since 1968, only one justice has failed to be retained in Pennsylvania. Had all three justices lost, the court could have become evenly split at 2-2, leaving rotation of judges from other courts until a special election in 2027. Interim appointments by Governor Josh Shapiro were possible but would have required two-thirds approval in the state senate — a very unlikely scenario.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has played a prominent role in shaping state law in recent years. It struck down the state’s gerrymandered congressional map in 2018 and issued rulings supporting voter access, including mail-in ballot rules. The retention of these three justices means that Democrats continue to hold significant influence over such legal decisions, which could have national consequences given Pennsylvania’s swing-state status.
While judicial retention elections often attract limited voter interest, this year’s contest drew substantial attention and funding. Campaign spending is expected to exceed $15 million, highlighting the increasing recognition of the influence state courts have on election and policy outcomes. Earlier this year, Wisconsin’s Supreme Court election drew more than $100 million in spending, signaling a growing trend across key states.
The stakes in Pennsylvania were underscored by high-profile political involvement. Former President Donald Trump urged voters to reject retention, labeling Donohue, Dougherty, and Wecht as “radical supreme court justices.” In contrast, former President Barack Obama, Governor Shapiro, and Democratic National Committee chair Ken Martin campaigned to retain them. Their involvement reflects how state court elections are increasingly recognized as shaping national policy and partisan balance.
Retention votes also matter because state supreme courts often decide critical issues around elections and voting laws. Pennsylvania, as a swing state, has a Supreme Court whose rulings can influence both federal and state elections. Maintaining a Democratic majority on the court helps ensure that key decisions on voter access, election administration, and other legal disputes remain consistent with party priorities.
Analysts note that judicial retention contests in swing states are now a major political battleground. They argue that voters are beginning to understand the impact of these judges’ decisions on everyday life, from local elections to statewide policy. As a result, campaigns are spending more on outreach, advertising, and mobilization efforts to influence judicial outcomes.
The Pennsylvania court retention vote demonstrates the growing significance of state judiciary elections in American politics. By holding on to their 5-2 majority, Democrats now control a court that will shape decisions on issues ranging from redistricting to voting access and abortion rights for the next decade. The outcome ensures that Pennsylvania remains a critical state for legal and political battles in the years ahead.
