DemDaily: The Keystone State’s Consequential Court
October 7, 2025
State Supreme Courts have taken on an outsized role in protecting our state and federal rights as the challenges to the most basic of those have multiplied under the administration of Donald Trump.
Partisan control of the courts has never been more critical to the consequences of redistricting, election law, civil rights, reproductive freedom, and other cornerstone democratic issues under unprecedented attack in the lead-up to the 2026 midterms.
In 2025, the most critical of those elections is being waged in the battleground state of Pennsylvania, where three state Supreme Court justices -- all Democrats -- are up for retention on a court that has played a pivotal role in voting rights fights over the last decade.
| Each state, DC and the territories has at least one supreme court, or court of last resort, which serves as its highest judiciary and the final judgment on appeals -- its primary function. Rulings on matters of federal law, however, can be appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States. |
The Landscape
While most states hold their judicial elections in even-numbered years, Pennsylvania holds its exclusively in the "off" years. All three of its statewide appellate courts — Supreme, Superior, and Commonwealth --are elected in partisan, statewide elections to ten-year terms.
The Keystone State's high court boasts a 5-2 Democratic majority with three seats up for "retention election" this year -- when, rather than cast a ballot among opposing candidates or parties, voters are asked to vote “yes” or “no” on whether to give the current justices another term.
Democrats have held the majority since 2015, when each of the three justices -- Christine Donohue (D), Kevin M. Dougherty (D), and David N. Wecht (D) -- was first elected.
Should any justice fail to win the support of a majority of voters (50%) and retention in November, Democratic Governor Josh Shapiro, subject to confirmation by a two-thirds vote of the Republican-controlled Pennsylvania state Senate, can appoint a temporary replacement until 2027, when a competitive partisan election would be held for a permanent replacement.
If the voters were to reject all three justices on November 4 -- and if the Senate did not approve of Shapiro's temporary appointees -- their seats would become vacant in January and leave the court deadlocked with a 2-2 partisan split until elections to fill the open seats in 2027.
Under that scenario, state Senate Republicans may decide it is more advantageous to let the court's stalemate remain, limiting the justices' ability to settle cases involving voting and election challenges through the 2026 midterm elections.
A weak or compromised court could hold grave implications for the key swing state in the 2028 presidential election. Just days before the 2024 election, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court affirmed a lower court ruling allowing voters to cast certain provisional ballots -- one of the Justice's high-profile rulings ensuring the right of eligible voters to have their ballots counted.
| The partisan breakdown of state supreme courts is: 19 controlled by Democrats, 32 controlled by Republicans, and one that is split. Twenty-one states initially select their justices through popular elections, which may be partisan or nonpartisan. In 26 states, the justices are appointed by the governor. Two states, South Carolina and Virginia, use a legislative election process, and New Mexico uses a hybrid system where justices are initially appointed by the governor and later face a partisan election. Terms vary by state, on average from 6-12 years. |
The New Era of Judicial Politics
Despite only one justice having lost a retention election since Pennsylvania first adopted them in 1968, state Republicans regard this as a rare but crucial opportunity to turn the tide of the court -- and are investing heavily in their chances.
While "up-or-down" vote overwhelmingly favors the incumbent, conservative groups have had some success in well-funded anti-retention campaigns in states like Oklahoma (2024) and Illinois (2020), where judges were ousted.
The historically sleepy, dignified retention election process has been increasingly weaponized in the current political environment, replete with attack ads, social media, and full GOTV operations. Substantial funding has come with the increased focus by the parties and the public on the role of the judiciary and the power of the courts in key policy battles with national implications.
In an April 1 victory that reverberated nationwide, voters in Wisconsin decisively elected Dane County Circuit Court Judge Susan Crawford, a Democrat, to the state Supreme Court -- securing its 4-3 liberal majority in the top presidential battleground state, which Trump won by less than 1% in 2024.
That judicial contest -- the most expensive state Supreme Court election in history at close to $100 million -- was considered among the most consequential of the 2025 elections, with the fate of reproductive rights, voting rights, union rights and fair electoral maps at stake in The Badger State.
While nothing approaching that figure, spending by candidates, political parties and outside interest groups in the November 4 Pennsylvania Supreme Court election is expected to easily exceed $10 million -- making it the most expensive US retention election in four decades.
Both state and national parties are flooding mailboxes and inboxes, with the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee (DLCC) each investing "six-figures" to support on-the-ground voter contact efforts, direct mail and paid media outreach to voters.
Democrats and allies have reportedly spent a minimum of $4 million on advertising for the campaign.The ACLU, Planned Parenthood, labor unions, trial lawyers and Democratic-aligned groups like Pennsylvanians for Judicial Fairness are running their own campaigns and expenditures.
The Pennsylvania Republican Party and national Republicans have spent approximately $1.5 million on advertising, and Pennsylvania’s richest man, right-wing billionaire Jeff Yass (TikTok), has spent $1.25 million funding a “vote no” campaign through a series of political action committees. That includes the Commonwealth Leaders Fund, run by GOP heavyweight Matt Brouillette.
According to ad-tracking firm AdImpact, Pennsylvania drew more campaign ad money than any other state in the 2024 cycle — over $1 billion.
DemList will keep you informed.
Important Voter Information: HERE
| The Keystone Swing State, which Donald Trump reclaimed by 1.7% in 2024, has alternated between the parties at the presidential level over the last four elections. A politically divided state government, Democrats control the Governor's mansion and the State House (by 1 seat), and the Republican Party controls the State Senate and the state Treasurer, Auditor General, and Attorney General's offices. Pennsylvania is represented in the US Senate by Democrat John Fetterman and Republican Dave McCormick, and in the US House by 10 Republicans and seven Democrats. |
DemList
Connecting You to The Party
Connecting You to Each Other
Kimberly Scott
Publisher
SignUp for the Daily updates on policy, politics and the players.
Follow DemList on Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn
Sources: Ballotpedia, Spotlight PA, State Court Report, GoErie, WPSU, AdImpact, CNN, KeystoneNewsRoom, AP, State SOS, Dem Party
