Pennsylvania Supreme Court

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court hears cases affecting every aspect of your life during the year. The justices who sit on this court will determine your access to education, protections for workers in the workplace, LGBTQ civil rights and gender equality, whether your ballot will count during elections, and whether and how the government protects the air you breathe, food you eat, and water you drink. With this power, the court can either ensure that state laws and state constitutional protections work for every person or subvert the rule of law in favor of an authoritarian government, the ultra-wealthy and powerful, and those who would exclude people from lives of self-governance and dignity. For example, earlier this year, the court affirmed parental rights for LGBTQ+ families irrespective of partners gender, ruling to protect a lesbian mother’s parental status and affirming recognition of legal parentage for children conceived through assisted reproduction.

One of the court’s highest profile decisions was delivered in 2018. Republicans in the state legislature drew congressional maps that disrupted the previous partisan balance across state districts in favor of an extreme partisan gerrymander inappropriately favoring Republicans in 13 out of 18 total districts. The League of Women Voters and Democrat voters challenged the maps, and the Pennsylvania Supreme Court agreed to hear the case. The court found the maps to be an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander and ordered new ones. Moreover, the court has been essential in ensuring access to the ballot and that every Pennsylvanian is fairly represented in our democracy. For instance, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court previously upheld Act 77, which permits no-excuse vote by mail for the first time in Pennsylvania history. This ruling is significant in the democracy and voting rights space, as approximately 40% of Pennsylvanians opted to vote by mail during the 2020 General Election. Pennsylvania’s highest court has also decided to revisit a case regarding the disqualification of mail-in ballots with incorrect or missing outer envelope dates that violate the state constitution. This case arises from the Republican National Committee appealing a Commonwealth Court decision that ordered the Philadelphia County Board of Elections to count rejected mail-in ballots from a September 2024 special election.

The court has been essential for strengthening worker protections and rights. In 2015, the city of Pittsburgh passed an ordinance mandating that any employee that works at least 35 hours a week is entitled to sick leave. However, business owners and employers rushed to challenge the constitutionality of the law. The case eventually ended up before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. In a win for workers in Pennsylvania, the court upheld the law. This was a huge step forward for the rights and dignity of all workers. Additionally, the court has also stepped in to defend workers’ eligibility for and right to overtime pay.

The court has also upheld important protections for valuable natural resources across the commonwealth. The court strengthened funding streams from oil and gas companies to natural conservation efforts. This was a significant win towards the protection of public lands and resources. In another decision, the court also increased transparency and accountability following toxic spills. The court found that companies were required to self-reports when those companies were responsible for contaminating spills that affected the drinking water of both public and private land owners.

These are just a few cases demonstrating the outsized impact the court can have on your most fundamental rights and constitutional protections. Learn more about your court and the justices on it below!

Pennsylvania selects its justices by partisan election. This means that candidates are listed on the ballot with a political party designation next to their name. For subsequent terms, supreme court justices are retained on the bench through retention elections, meaning the elections are uncontested. Instead, candidates appear with a yes or no. In order to remain on the bench, a majority of voters must vote to retain the justice.

If an unexpected vacancy occurs, the governor will nominate an individual to fill the vacancy on the bench. The State Senate must confirm this nominee. To remain on the bench, the interim appointed justice must stand for election, which must occur at least 10 months after the appointment.

Debra Todd (D), Chief Justice

Chief Justice Debra Todd (D) was first elected to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in 2007. She was retained on the bench during the 2017 election. Chief Justice Todd’s term will end in 2027. Todd was officially sworn in as Chief Justice of the court in January 2023 due to former Chief Justice Max Baer’s passing in late 2022. In order to remain on the bench, Todd must face another retention election in November 2027.

Legal career

• Upon graduation from law school, Todd worked as an in-house counsel for the US Steel Corporation. In 1987, Todd transitioned to private practice and eventually started her own firm. She remained in private practice until 1999. That year, Todd was first elected to the Pennsylvania Superior Court. She served as a judge on the superior court until her election to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in 2007.

Christine Donohue (D)

Justice Donohue was first elected to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in 2015. Her current term will expire in January 2026. In order to remain on the bench, Justice Donohue will stand for retention in November 2025.

Legal career

• Donohue worked in private practice for almost her entire career prior to joining the bench. Upon graduation from law school, Donohue first practiced personal injury law but later transitioned to complex commercial litigation. She remained in private practice until 2007. That year, Donohue ran for the superior court and won. Then, in 2015, she was elected to a seat on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

Kevin Dougherty (D)

Justice Dougherty was first elected to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in 2015. His current term will expire in January 2026. To remain on the bench, Dougherty must stand for retention in November of 2025.

Legal career

• Dougherty first served as a law clerk at a litigation firm in New York City. In 1990, Dougherty returned to Pennsylvania and served as an assistant district attorney in Philadelphia. Then in 1995, Dougherty transitioned into private practice. He was a partner at a firm, where he practiced both criminal defense and civil litigation, with a focus on family law. In 2001, Dougherty was appointed to the Court of Common Pleas in Philadelphia to fill an unexpected vacancy on the court. He was later elected to a full 10-year term and won an additional retention term. In 2015, Dougherty ran for and won a seat on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

David Wecht (D)

Justice Wecht was first elected to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in 2015. His current term will expire in January 2026. In order to remain on the bench, Wecht must stand for retention election in November 2025.

Legal career

• Wecht began his legal career as a clerk for the Honorable George MacKinnon, USCJ, US Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. After his clerkship, Wecht joined a law firm in DC where he maintained a diverse practice portfolio. After four years in DC, Wecht returned to Pittsburgh. He practiced as a litigator at a firm but soon opened his own litigation practice with his parents. In 2003, Wecht was appointed to the Court of Common Pleas for Allegheny County. He served in that position until 2011. That year, Wecht was elected to be a judge on the Superior Court of Pennsylvania. In 2015, Wecht ran for and won a seat on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

Sallie Mundy (R)

Justice Mundy was appointed to the supreme court in 2016 and elected to a full 10-year term 2017. Her current term will end in January 2028. In order to remain on the bench, Mundy must stand for retention election in 2027.

Legal career

• Upon graduation from law school, Mundy clerked for Judge Robert Kemp in Tioga County, Pennsylvania. When her clerkship was completed, Mundy joined the firm McQuaide Blasko focused on personal injury, insurance, and medical malpractice disputes. After she left that firm, she continued in private practice and maintained a diverse portfolio ranging from criminal defense to plaintiffs’ personal injury. In 2009, Mundy was elected to the superior court. She served in that capacity until she was appointed to the supreme court in 2016.

Kevin Brobson (R)

Justice Brobson was first elected to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in 2021. His current term will end in January 2032. In order to remain on the bench, he must stand for retention election in November 2031.

Legal career

• Brobson started his career as a clerk to the Honorable James McGirr Kelly, USDJ, Eastern District of Pennsylvania. After completing his clerkship, Brobson joined a private litigation firm. At the firm, he focused on state administrative law until his election to the Commonwealth Court in November 2009. He was retained for a second term in 2019. Then in 2021, Brobson ran for and won a seat on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

Daniel McCaffery (D)

Justice McCaffery was first elected to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in 2023 and assumed his position in January 2024. His term will end in January 2034. In order to remain on the bench, he must stand for retention election in November 2033.

Legal career

• Upon graduation from law school, McCaffery began his legal career as an Assistant District Attorney in Philadelphia County. In 1997, he switched to private practice at Friedman, Schuman P.C. McCaffery remained in private practice until his election as judge to the First Judicial District of Pennsylvania in 2013. He then ran for and won election to the Superior Court in 2019. He remained on the Superior Court until his election to the supreme court in 2023.

Criminal Justice

Commonwealth v. Batts (2017)

The court held there is a rebuttable presumption against life without the possibility of parole for juvenile offenders. This decision acknowledged that children are distinct from adults and their age must be considered in situations where they face severe punishment in the criminal justice system.

Democracy and Voting Rights

League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania v. Commonwealth (2018)

The court struck down Pennsylvania’s 2011 congressional map as a partisan gerrymander that inappropriately favored Republicans, in violation of the state constitution. Under the gerrymandered maps, Republicans held a 13-5 advantage in the Pennsylvania congressional delegation despite carrying __% of the popular vote. Since the constitutionally appropriate map took effect in 2018, there has been a 9-9 partisan balance, which is more reflective of the power balanceo f balance of the state’s voters. This was a groundbreaking decision because it ensured that Pennsylvania voters selected their representatives rather than having representatives select their voters.

Kelly v. Commonwealth (2020)

On a unanimous vote, the court threw out a lower court order that prevented the state from certifying dozens of contests that were part of the 2020 election. U.S. Representative Mike Kelly and other Republican plaintiffs brought the case seeking to either throw out 2.5 million mail-in ballots or wipe out the election results and direct the Republican-controlled legislature to pick Pennsylvania’s presidential electors. Noteably, the court observed that contrary to the specious arguments offered by the legislators, the court found no basis legal basis to reject the identified ballots.

Pennsylvania Democratic Party v. Boockvar (2020)

In an important case before the 2020 presidential election, the court ruled that ballots mailed before or on Election Day, but received up to three days after Election Day, must be counted. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the immense strain on the postal system, the normal deadline would have likely resulted in the disenfranchisement of thousands of voters. The court extended the deadline so that all eligible votes could be counted during the election.

Disability Rights

Washington v. Department of Public Welfare (2018)

The court, in a unanimous decision, took an important step to protect Pennsylvanians living in poverty due to serious disability, domestic violence, or other factors preventing them from working. The court struck down a law (Act 80 of 2012) that eliminated cash benefits and made it more difficult for poor families with young children to qualify for aid.

Education

In re: Appeal of Steelton-Highspire School District (2021)

The court ruled that a proposal for a majority-white school to secede from a majority-minority school district and merge with a majority-white school district could not proceed without further consideration of the financial and academic impacts of withdrawal on the remaining schools in the district.

Environmental Protections

Robinson Township v. Commonwealth (2016)

The court struck down a provision of Pennsylvania law that required the state to notify only public, but not private, well owners of toxic spills that could affect drinking water. It also struck down a medical “gag rule” provision that would have prevented doctors from discussing chemicals involved in fracking with their patients.

Briggs v. Southwestern Energy (2020)

The court ruled that oil and gas companies could not be held liable for underground trespass when their fracking operations drained chemicals from adjacent land. This ruling shielded oil and gas companies from accountability and limited protections for private landowners.

Pennsylvania Environmental Defense Foundation v. Commonwealth (2021)

In a victory for environmental justice, the court ruled that money raised from oil and gas leases in state forests must be used for conservation efforts. Thus, rather than going into the state’s general fund, millions of dollars will now be used to conserve public natural resources.

Clean Air Council v. Commmonwealth of Pennsylvania (2023)

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court upheld the rights of environmental advocates and everyday citizens harmed by oil and gas companies’ permits and industrial activity, ruling that when these advocates and individuals challenge permits and sue these companies, they are entitled to compensation for the legal fees. This decision holds both the government and large corporations accountable for the environmental harm done to communities.

Healthcare and Reproductive Rights

Allegheny Reproductive Health Center, et. al v. Pennsylvania Department of Human Services, et. al (2024)

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court issued an opinion that found a right to abortion in the commonwealth’s constitution and ordered a lower court to reconsider whether a law that prevents Medicaid from covering abortion care is unconstitutional.

Labor and Worker Rights

Pennsylvania Restaurant & Lodging Association v. Pittsburgh (2019)

The court ruled that employees working 35 hours within Pittsburgh are eligible for paid sick time. This decision ensured that covered employees are guaranteed the opportunity to receive time off that may be used for their own healthcare or the care of a family member.

Lowman v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review (2020)

The court ruled that an out-of-work Uber driver was eligible to receive unemployment benefits. This decision has significant precedential value and secured more protections for workers in the “gig economy.”

Chevalier v. General Nutrition Centers, Inc. (2020)

The court ruled that under Pennsylvania’s Minimum Wage Act, eligible workers must be paid 1.5 times their regular rate for working overtime. This decision expanded protections for workers by ensuring they are paid a sufficient wage for overtime hours.

Harmon v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review (2020)

The court ruled that an individual sentenced to a part-time prison sentence is still eligible for unemployment benefits. The blanket denial of unemployment benefits to anyone serving any kind of criminal sentence would undermine efforts to keep people with criminal records, who already face stigmas and barriers to employment, connected to the workforce.

In re Amazon.com Fulfillment Center FLSA Litigation (2021)

In a case involving Amazon, the Court held that under Pennsylvania law, employers must pay workers for their time spent going through mandatory security screenings. This decision ensures that workers are compensated for all the time they are required to be at the workplace.

Important dates to remember  

• October 20, 2025 – Last day to register to vote. Learn how to register to vote here!
• October 28, 2025 – Last day to request an absentee or mail-in ballot. Your request must be submitted and accepted by the county board of elections by 5pm!
• November 4, 2025 – Election Day! Polls are open from 7am to 8pm.

Your voter checklist  

• Are you registered to vote?
  • Check your voter status
  • Register to vote here.
  • Remember, the last day to register to vote is October 20!

• Do you have your plan to vote?
  • Mail-in
    • Request your mail-in ballot here
    • Remember, the last day to request a mail-in ballot if October 28!
    • Do you know how to return your ballot?
• In-person
  • Do you know your polling place? Double check it here!

• Are you voting at this polling place for the first time or is this your first time ever voting?
  • Do you have an acceptable ID?