The Pennsylvania State Supreme Court will keep its 5-2 Democratic tilt, as voters in the state opted to re-elect three incumbent justices for additional 10-year terms, according to The Associated Press.
Retaining the three justices — Kevin M. Dougherty, Christine Donohue and David N. Wecht — ensures that the court’s Democratic lean will hold through the next presidential election, a critical victory for Democrats in the biggest swing state in the country.
They were re-elected on Tuesday through a process known as a retention election — they had no Republican-backed opponents. Instead, voters in Pennsylvania simply voted “yes” or “no” on whether to retain the justices for 10 more years.
Historically, sitting justices are often successful: Only once this century has a Supreme Court justice in Pennsylvania not been retained. But the races drew outsize interest this year, as control over state supreme courts has become a vital part of both parties’ quest for electoral power.
Litigation in election matters has surged in recent years and state court systems have played an increasingly important role in refereeing legislative maps and voting laws. And the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has already played a significant role in such matters.
Last year, the court weighed in on numerous voting challenges in the weeks before the presidential election, including the right of voters to cast provisional ballots after their mail ballots were rejected for procedural reasons.
In 2022, it upheld the state’s mail-in voting law. In 2020, the Democratic justices ruled that ballot drop boxes were permitted in the state. And in 2018, the court ruled that the state’s congressional district map was a partisan gerrymander that “clearly, plainly and palpably” violated the state’s Constitution.
The importance of the court was evident in the amount of money that poured into what are normally overlooked down-ballot elections: More than $16.5 million was spent on advertising for the Pennsylvania races in this cycle, according to AdImpact, an ad-tracking firm. The vast majority of that spending came from the “yes” side, whose backers spent roughly $13.7 million on ads, compared with just $2.8 million for the “no” side, according to AdImpact.
But the quirky nature of retention races makes tracking spending exceptionally difficult. Douglas Keith, the deputy director of the Democracy program at the Brennan Center for Justice, has estimated that more than $20.5 million has been spent on the contests, with about $15 million being spent in favor of keeping the justices and about $5.5 million being spent against them.
The flood of money into Pennsylvania followed a growing trend of these otherwise sleepy judicial elections seeing a surge of money and attention — spending on such races has reached into nine figures nationally. In April, a race for the Wisconsin State Supreme Court drew more than $100 million in spending, with both Republicans and Democrats acknowledging that flipping the court in the critical swing state could sway congressional and state legislative maps, as well as abortion access.
Despite the hyperpartisan political atmosphere and the flood of outside money, the justices are limited in how they can campaign. They can expound on their judicial philosophy, but they cannot divulge specific feelings on a case or issue that could come before the court.
The three victories on Tuesday will ensure that Democrats control the court through the next presidential election, but not necessarily through the round of redistricting scheduled to take place after the 2030 United States census. Justice Donohue is 72, and the court has a mandatory retirement age of 75.
Nick Corasaniti is a Times reporter covering national politics, with a focus on voting and elections.
The post Democrats to Keep Majority on Pennsylvania State Supreme Court appeared first on New York Times.
