Historic Day at Pennsylvania Polls: Voters Hold Supreme Court's Future in Their Hands

November 4, 2025 — While the nation watches high-profile races in New York and Virginia, something equally significant is happening right here in Pennsylvania. Voters across the Commonwealth are making a decision that could reshape the state's legal landscape for the next decade.

And most people have no idea it's happening.

The Race Nobody's Talking About (But Should Be)

Three sitting Pennsylvania Supreme Court justices—Christine Donohue, Kevin Dougherty, and David Wecht—are on today's ballot asking voters for retention to serve another ten-year term. Unlike typical elections, there are no opponents. Just a simple question: Yes or No.

Pennsylvania Democratic Party Chair Eugene DePasquale called it "the most important retention race in Pennsylvania history"—a statement that caught my attention as I dug into this story.

Here's why this matters: Control of Pennsylvania's 5-2 Democratic Supreme Court majority hangs in the balance PBS, and this court has become the final word on some of the most contentious issues facing the state.

What's Really at Stake

After reviewing the coverage, I found these justices have ruled on cases that directly impact Pennsylvania families:

The court held that Pennsylvania's Equal Rights Amendment means women have equal access to making healthcare decisions that control their own body, and ruled that the Pennsylvania school funding formula means every child has to get equal access to quality education.

But here's where it gets complicated.

The Controversy Everyone's Fighting About

The biggest flashpoint? Congressional maps.

The Court struck down the Commonwealth's previous map in 2018 which had given Republicans a 13-5 advantage in a nearly even partisan state, and has itself drawn the Congressional map since the General Assembly and Governor Tom Wolf could not agree on a map.

The map currently stands at 10-7 Republicans after two seats flipped to the GOP in 2024, with five of the 17 seats seen to be competitive on a year-to-year basis.

Democrats argue this creates fair representation. Guy Ciarrocchi, a writer for RealClear Pennsylvania and Broad + Liberty, disagrees, arguing that "the court threw out Pennsylvania's map before the 2018 election under the theory that too many Republicans were winning" and then "the court drew their own map," which he believes violated their bounds.

The COVID Factor

Then there's the pandemic legacy. While the Court eventually struck down COVID-related school mask mandates in 2021, Republicans have tried to remind voters of COVID restrictions the court said Governor Wolf had the authority to enact.

According to Ciarrocchi: "Every time we went to court, whether it was dealing with being able to go to a house of worship, open up a local appliance store, get our kids in school, the Supreme Court gave Governor Wolf unfettered power".

Many Pennsylvanians haven't forgotten those restrictions.

The Money Behind the Messages

Here's where this gets really interesting: Voters have seen ads and mailers from millions in outside money that has poured in to try and unseat the justices, including from conservative billionaire Jeff Yass.

DePasquale alleges one mailer showed the gerrymandered map that was actually struck down by the court, not the one they enacted, calling it "an attempt to try to trick voters, particularly Democratic voters" and "gutter politics".

What the Credentials Say

One fact stands out in my research: All three justices have been endorsed by the nonpartisan Pennsylvania Bar Association. That's not a political endorsement—it's a professional assessment of their qualifications.

DePasquale argues they are "committed to the law" and "doing exactly what judges and justices should do, and that is interpreting the Constitution to the best of their ability," while noting "they also don't always agree".

The Bottom Line

After researching this race, here's my take: This vote is about more than three judges. It's about whether you believe the court has:

Protected constitutional rights and ensured fairness — as supporters argue

OR

Overstepped judicial authority and acted as partisans — as critics claim

Ciarrocchi summed up the opposition view: "These are not people to give another 10-year term to," while DePasquale countered: "If you want to make sure that we have competent jurists on the bench that are recommended by the nonpartisan Bar Association...then vote yes".

Why This Matters for 2028

Partisan control of the court could play a role in the 2028 presidential race because justices might be asked to rule on election disputes in one of the country's battleground states PBS.

Think about that. The judges you're voting on today might decide Pennsylvania's electoral votes in three years.

Polls close at 8 p.m. If you haven't voted yet, you still have time.

Sources:

• FOX43 WPMT-TV: "Pennsylvania voters to decide future of state Supreme Court in high-stakes retention election" (November 3, 2025)
• PBS News: "Live Results: Pennsylvania Supreme Court 2025 election" (November 3, 2025)
• NBC10 Philadelphia: "Live updates: Follow Election Day in New Jersey and Pennsylvania" (November 4, 2025)

This analysis is based on reporting from multiple news sources covering Pennsylvania's 2025 judicial retention election.