Pennsylvania is facing a critical judicial retention election this fall with enormous consequences that extend well beyond the state—and into the 2028 presidential race. Gov. Josh Shapiro, who himself is viewed as a possible presidential hopeful in 2028, is stepping into the spotlight by endorsing three incumbent Democratic justices on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. In a new campaign ad launched this Tuesday, Shapiro warns voters about the very real "threats to our freedoms" if these justices are not retained.
In November, Pennsylvania voters will cast a simple yes-or-no ballot on whether to keep Justices Kevin Dougherty, Christine Donohue, and David Wecht for another 10-year term during what is called a retention vote. Unlike typical elections, these justices don’t face opponents; it’s purely a matter of approving or rejecting their continuation on the bench.
Shapiro’s ad emphasizes the justices’ track record in safeguarding women's rights to abortion and birth control, and their defense of broader civil liberties. He urges voters to "Vote ‘yes’ for a Supreme Court that protects us."
Historically, only a single Pennsylvania justice has ever failed to win retention, which happened two decades ago—underscoring how rare it is for incumbents to be removed. However, with so much at stake, Republicans are heavily investing in efforts to oust these justices, and Democrats, alongside Shapiro, are mobilizing to counter that momentum.
If even two of these justices are voted off, the court’s makeup would shift from a liberal 5-2 majority, potentially allowing Republicans to take control in 2027. This shift would be profound, coming just before the high-stakes 2028 presidential election and with the possibility of influencing how election-related disputes are decided.
James Markley, communications director for the Pennsylvania GOP, didn’t shy away from the significance, stating, "We’ve only seen one of these justices knocked out because of retention. So in November, when we knock off all three, it’ll be a pretty big deal."
Echoing the gravity, Eugene DePasquale, chair of the Pennsylvania Democratic Party, compared this race to Wisconsin’s fiercely contested Supreme Court election earlier this year, saying, "This one is that on steroids."
Pennsylvania is a perennial battleground state with a history of swinging between Democrats and Republicans in presidential elections, making every political battle here especially impactful. Indeed, Pennsylvania attracted more campaign ad spending than any other state in 2024, surpassing $1 billion, as tracked by AdImpact.
Since 2020, the state’s high court has been the epicenter of high-stakes litigation, especially around election laws. The liberal majority on the court sided with Democrats in critical cases involving mail-in ballot deadlines, provisional ballots, and signature verification—decisions that have shaped the outcomes of recent presidential races.
If Republicans flip the court’s ideological balance by 2027, it could drastically change rulings on similar disputes in future elections, which in a state as closely contested as Pennsylvania could alter national political outcomes.
“This is, in many respects, the most important race in the country that nobody’s talking about,” said state Representative Malcolm Kenyatta, a vice chair of the Democratic National Committee.
Beyond elections, the court will also have a pivotal role in redrawing congressional districts following the 2030 census and will tackle major cases concerning abortion, environmental policies, and education law—areas where judicial ideology deeply influences outcomes.
Markley reinforced this, noting that removing two or three justices now would set the stage for a 2027 power struggle over the court’s majority, right before critical events like the 2028 election and new redistricting. He added, "These judges have had a heavy hand in those cases in the past."
The retention vote’s consequences could also play out immediately. If justices are recalled, Gov. Shapiro can appoint replacements temporarily, but those appointments require confirmation by the state Senate, which is under Republican control. This introduces uncertainty about whether Shapiro’s picks would be approved.
Matt Brouillette, CEO of the conservative Commonwealth Partners—actively opposing the justices—pointed out the unpredictability, saying, "It’s uncertain whether they would consent to Josh Shapiro’s appointments."
The justices themselves responded to CNN in a joint statement, highlighting endorsements from the Pennsylvania Bar Association, labor unions, Planned Parenthood, and statewide police organizations. "The three of us have proven our qualifications and commitment to the law, and will be honored to continue to serve the people of Pennsylvania," they said.
With stakes this high, both parties and their national allies are ramping up their campaigns, inundating voters with ads and mailers. Data from AdImpact shows that Democrats have spent around $4 million on the retention campaign, while Republicans have invested about $1.5 million so far, with amounts expected to grow as November approaches.
Opponents argue it’s time to rethink the court’s direction. Markley offered a sharp rebuke, invoking a Philadelphia Eagles star to illustrate his point: "Our chair has something he loves to say all the time: Saquon Barkley is possibly the best player in the NFL, and not even he gets a 10-year contract."
But here’s where it gets controversial—should lifetime or long-term judicial appointments be reconsidered entirely? Is a decade-long term for justices appropriate given the profound impact they have on elections, reproductive rights, and environmental regulations? These are questions that Pennsylvania voters will not only answer but debate fiercely.
Are you ready to weigh in on this quietly monumental race? Do you believe long judicial terms ensure independence, or do they risk entrenching partisan power? Share your thoughts and let’s get the conversation started.
