Three Pennsylvania Supreme Court justices, including Justice David Wecht, are campaigning for retention as their 10-year terms come to an end, with voters set to decide their fate on Nov. 4.”It’s a great feeling to be here in my hometown, and there’s no place like it in the world,” Wecht said.The retention process stems from a compromise made during a constitutional convention in the 1960s, where Pennsylvania voters agreed on a system that combines partisan elections with a nonpartisan retention vote after 10 years.”The compromise was that judges at all levels would be elected in partisan elections, and then after 10 years, they would stand in a nonpartisan yes/no election, which would test the people’s assessment of their merit, their integrity and their competence,” Wecht said.Political ads have been urging voters to either support or oppose the retention of Justices Christine Donohue, Kevin Dougherty and Wecht, all Democrats.If any of these justices are not retained, a partisan election will be held in 2027 to replace them.”That’s the world we live in. The reality is that that’s advocacy in our system. It’s hard for people to fight their way through all that literature,” Wecht said.Ken Gormley, a legal scholar and president of Duquesne University, criticized the political nature of the ads.”There’s so much misleading stuff here,” Gormley said.Gormley said the retention vote should focus on whether the justices have fulfilled their duties without ethical infractions.”If the person has done their job as a judge, if they haven’t committed any great ethical infractions, if they haven’t failed to come to work, if they go in and do their job as sworn to uphold the Constitution and make their best decisions, the answer has always been yes,” Gormley said.Gormley noted that there has been one exception when Justice Russell Nigro was voted out in 2005 after a controversial pay raise bill.This election cycle, ads have also highlighted Wecht’s opinion on the Allegheny Reproductive case, where he and his colleagues ruled that denying Medicaid funding for women’s reproductive health care violated Pennsylvania’s Equal Rights Amendment.”My colleagues and I decided that a law that the state Legislature had passed, which guaranteed Medicaid funding for men for reproductive health care but denied it to women, violated Pennsylvania’s Equal Rights Amendment,” Wecht said.As the ads continue, Gormley hopes this political approach is an anomaly.”I would hope this is an aberration, and I would hope as we go into future cycles where there are Republican originally justices up for retention, voters treat it exactly the same way,” Gormley said. “As long as they have done their job faithfully as judges, then they should get a ‘yes’ vote and continue to do that work because, ultimately, our system is only protected if you have one branch that is neutral and calls the shots as they see them. That’s what protects us as a democratic society.”Voters are reminded that the retention questions are on the second page of the ballot, and failing to turn it over means missing out on half of their vote.

PITTSBURGH —

Three Pennsylvania Supreme Court justices, including Justice David Wecht, are campaigning for retention as their 10-year terms come to an end, with voters set to decide their fate on Nov. 4.

“It’s a great feeling to be here in my hometown, and there’s no place like it in the world,” Wecht said.

The retention process stems from a compromise made during a constitutional convention in the 1960s, where Pennsylvania voters agreed on a system that combines partisan elections with a nonpartisan retention vote after 10 years.

“The compromise was that judges at all levels would be elected in partisan elections, and then after 10 years, they would stand in a nonpartisan yes/no election, which would test the people’s assessment of their merit, their integrity and their competence,” Wecht said.

Political ads have been urging voters to either support or oppose the retention of Justices Christine Donohue, Kevin Dougherty and Wecht, all Democrats.

If any of these justices are not retained, a partisan election will be held in 2027 to replace them.

“That’s the world we live in. The reality is that that’s advocacy in our system. It’s hard for people to fight their way through all that literature,” Wecht said.

Ken Gormley, a legal scholar and president of Duquesne University, criticized the political nature of the ads.

“There’s so much misleading stuff here,” Gormley said.

Gormley said the retention vote should focus on whether the justices have fulfilled their duties without ethical infractions.

“If the person has done their job as a judge, if they haven’t committed any great ethical infractions, if they haven’t failed to come to work, if they go in and do their job as sworn to uphold the Constitution and make their best decisions, the answer has always been yes,” Gormley said.

Gormley noted that there has been one exception when Justice Russell Nigro was voted out in 2005 after a controversial pay raise bill.

This election cycle, ads have also highlighted Wecht’s opinion on the Allegheny Reproductive case, where he and his colleagues ruled that denying Medicaid funding for women’s reproductive health care violated Pennsylvania’s Equal Rights Amendment.

“My colleagues and I decided that a law that the state Legislature had passed, which guaranteed Medicaid funding for men for reproductive health care but denied it to women, violated Pennsylvania’s Equal Rights Amendment,” Wecht said.

As the ads continue, Gormley hopes this political approach is an anomaly.

“I would hope this is an aberration, and I would hope as we go into future cycles where there are Republican originally justices up for retention, voters treat it exactly the same way,” Gormley said. “As long as they have done their job faithfully as judges, then they should get a ‘yes’ vote and continue to do that work because, ultimately, our system is only protected if you have one branch that is neutral and calls the shots as they see them. That’s what protects us as a democratic society.”

Voters are reminded that the retention questions are on the second page of the ballot, and failing to turn it over means missing out on half of their vote.