Pennsylvania Supreme Court faces key election as justice warns gridlock would be ‘disastrous’
Pennsylvania voters will decide Tuesday in an unusually contentious election whether three Democratic justices should remain on the state Supreme Court for another 10-year term, a vote that could deadlock for years if they are removed.
One of those three justices, David Wecht, warned of what such a scenario would mean for the critical battleground state.
“It would be disastrous,” Wecht told NBC News in an interview on Friday. “It is very difficult to work with an abbreviated court.” “I faced the six-member court, and the six-member court led to a lot of deadlock and a lot of deadlock and a lot of incremental work for the remaining six. That was just when we were one seat behind the court. If the court were to get three seats down, there would be a lot of 2-to-2 ties.”
Wecht, along with Justices Christine Donohue and Kevin Dougherty, are the three members of the Democrats’ 5-2 majority on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court who are up for retention elections on Tuesday.
Retention elections, which occur after a decade on the bench in Pennsylvania, are yes-or-no votes that are typically down-ballot contests.
Few Pennsylvania judges have lost their jobs this way. But with the Democrats’ majority at risk ahead of the 2026 and 2028 elections, this year’s Remain vote has attracted huge money and attention. If all three justices lose and the Republican-controlled Senate and Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro cannot agree on interim appointments, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court could deadlock 2-2 until the end of 2027.
“You’re going to have a four-member court for two full calendar years, because it’s impossible, it’s not possible for this Senate to confirm one nominee that Governor Shapiro sends them,” Wecht said.
A deadlocked state Supreme Court would defer to lower courts, and even if it decided a case, it likely wouldn’t set a new precedent for the state, according to Wecht, who said four members are needed to establish a precedent. Unanimous decisions are very rare in the state Supreme Court, which typically handles difficult legal questions.
“If you have a 3-1 finding in Smith v. Jones, that applies to Smith and Jones. It governs the case between Smith and Jones, but it is not a precedent for any other case,” he said. “Precedent is the primary reason we created our court. We are not just deciding Smith v. Jones, we are deciding a legal question that applies now and in the future throughout Pennsylvania to everyone.”
Retention elections have attracted significant advertising spending and attention. Former President Barack Obama and Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro have publicly supported the three Democratic justices. On Sunday evening, President Donald Trump Published on Social Truth He urged Pennsylvanians to “vote ‘no, no, no’ for the liberal Justices Donohue, Dougherty, and Wicht.”
“Take care Pennsylvania: On November 4th, you can restore the rule of law and defend the Constitution,” Trump wrote.
Correspondence to a conservative groupwhich Wecht has vocally criticized, claimed that “the liberal Supreme Court gerrymandered congressional districts to help Democrats win,” even though the court ruled in 2018 that the GOP’s map was unconstitutional.
Wecht said the reaction to this ruling contributed to the division in this election.
“When you have a young child and you take away a toy or a gift toy, that little child will whine and scream and make a fuss. And that’s exactly what happened,” Fichte said. “I think it was poison in the approach of some of the same partisans and their descendants who are now attacking us in what is supposed to be a nonpartisan election.”