I am compelled to vote “no” on the retention of the three Pennsylvania Supreme Court justices who are campaigning together.

First of all, I want to address the concerns of a previous letter writer who questioned the cost of a cardboard mailer encouraging a “no” vote (“Critical of mailers opposing retention of Democratic state Supreme Court justices,” Oct. 12 LNP | LancasterOnline). You should be really concerned over the cost of producing and airing television spots to support “yes” votes. Where is that money coming from? It must be coming from the political action committees that support the “yes” side.

In their TV spot, the justices claim that police support them. Not an actual police union, but apparently some random officers back them, so the justices claim they are supported by unspecified “police.” The so-called “Independent Bar Association” that the TV spot states endorsed them? It doesn’t exist. As an attorney, that bothers me, and it should bother everyone. The actual Pennsylvania Bar Association provides ratings for candidates but does not make endorsements.

The most troublesome part of this political campaign for a nonpolitical position is how the justices are prejudging issues, just like they did from the bench. Their claims in the TV spot of “protecting this” and “protecting that” seem to indicate that they have not and will not interpret cases based on the law and the facts — which is their job! — but rather that they will continue to ignore legislation and make law from the bench.

That is not their job, and it is scary to think that they will continue to do so. I am voting “no” to political hacks running for retention.

Brian Youngerman

Mount Joy

Success! An email has been sent to with a link to confirm list signup.

Error! There was an error processing your request.