HARRISBURG – A desire to initiate change was the prevailing theme discussed by four candidates vying for a seat on the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania this year in an online forum on Wednesday discussing their platforms and beliefs.
The “PA Supreme Court Candidates” forum was moderated by David Senoff of First Law Strategy Group and hosted by Pennsylvanians for Modern Courts and the Free Library of Philadelphia, in conjunction with the League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania, the Pennsylvania Bar Association, the Allegheny County Bar Association and the Philadelphia Bar Association.
Participating in the forum were Commonwealth Court judges P. Kevin Brobson and Patricia A. McCullough, Superior Court Judge Maria C. McLaughlin and Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas Judge Paula A. Patrick.
Each candidate was given an opportunity to answer questions on a range of issues, spanning from the reasons behind their seeking office on the state’s highest court, to their personal backgrounds and what voters should infer from their party affiliation, among others.
Desire to Run for a Seat on the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
As for the motivation to become a state Supreme Court justice, all of the candidates touted their records and desires to bring what they feel are their singularly-unique perspectives to the high court.
“Why I want to leave my court and go to the [state] Supreme Court is to make even more of an impact. I think over the course of my career, everything I’ve done has been in steps, from being a litigator and prosecutor, to being a trial judge and an appellate judge. This is now the next step and it seems natural to me,” McLaughlin said.
“I want to get to that the [state Supreme] Court because I believe it’s necessary for someone who gets there to not only just have an impact, but to be able to make a change. I believe in upholding and defending our Constitutions and our rule of law. I think that is missing right now from our Court,” Patrick stated.
Both remaining candidates spoke about their positions on the Commonwealth Court preparing them to serve on the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
“We haven’t had a Commonwealth Court judge on the [state] Supreme Court in 15 years, since Justice Sandra Schultz Newman resigned. Over the last 10 years, what I’ve seen is some of the most consequential decisions that have come out of the [state] Supreme Court, have really been matters that emanate from the Commonwealth Court’s jurisdiction. I think bringing that experience as a 14-year litigator dealing with clients who had to deal with government and government compliance, as well as my being in my 12th year on the Commonwealth Court ensuring government follows the law, I think that’s a new voice that can make a difference on the [state] Supreme Court,” Brobson said.
“I’m also on my 12th year on the Commonwealth Court. I think I would bring a different perspective to the Court. I believe in restorative and equal justice, and have worked with many programs to improve the system of justice. I’ve found that it’s most advantageous to be working at it from the very top down, and one can be very influential at this level.” McCullough stated.
McCullough added in prior election campaigns, she did not take financial contributions from attorneys or political actions committees, because she never wanted the public to question if she was “compromised.”
How the State’s Top Court Decisions Affect Pennsylvanians Daily
When Senoff asked about how the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania’s decisions impact the daily lives of Pennsylvanians, each candidate mentioned the broad range of issues touched by the Court.
“The [state] Supreme Court can issue opinions on how we educate our children, how we care for our elderly, how we protect our historic and natural resources, how we elect our public officials,” Brobson said.
“If people are looking to have confidence in their judiciary in Pennsylvania, the [state] Supreme Court is where they should look first. They should look for justices that they know they have confidence in to come from high ethical standards and high ethical backgrounds that represent all Pennsylvanians.”
According to Patrick, cases that end up being heard by the Supreme Court originate at the Common Pleas Court level, and it’s important that voters elect judges who know what their rights are.
“We’re looking for justices on our [state] Supreme Court that will be fair, that will understand law, that will apply the law, and the impact that I think judges as a whole will have on the lives of citizens is very important,” Patrick said.
“It’s important that we elect judges who understand what our rights are, and who are interested in preserving our rule of law.”
McCullough also pointed to the wide spectrum of rights which the state’s top court can influence.
“What doesn’t it impact? In the last year alone, we’ve seen almost every single right known to mankind drastically impacted, every single right. The impact was felt primarily by the courts, the higher courts: The Supreme Court of the United States, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.”
“Besides the topics that go there that affect all of the people, taxes, churches, schools, property, Right-to-Know Law, redistricting, elections, people want justice. And they want fair trials, they want fair and equal access to the Court and they want to make sure that this is the same across all of the Courts of Common Pleas and all of the appellate courts in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.”
Meanwhile, McLaughlin referred to the “empathy and compassion” desired by voters in a state Supreme Court justice, and cited both her experience in many facets of law and her time as a single mother raising two sons, as the source of those qualities.
“They also want a justice who doesn’t just talk the talk, but walks the walk; that’s not just around during campaigns, but is out in the community, like I am,” McLaughlin said.
“I never forget when I rule on any matter, whether it was as a trial judge, whether it was as a prosecutor and taking a stance on something, or as an appellate court judge, I never forget that my name on that opinion or that order affects a family’s life.”
Supreme Court Candidates Say Political Affiliations Won’t Affect Decision-Making
In Pennsylvania, it is required that judges run with a registered political party affiliation. Though, according to each of the candidates, all of whom are running as Republicans with the exception of McLaughlin, their political registrations will not have an impact on how they rule on cases.
Brobson said that for a judge, being called fair is “the best compliment” one can receive – and that he wants to be a judge, not a politician.
“What I think you can infer from [my political affiliation] is what bears out in my record as a judge for the last 11 years: I am considered a strict constructionist, I believe in the separation of powers, I believe in judicial restraint, I believe in reading the law as it is written and provisions to the Constitution as they are written. But I also believe in fairness, I believe in equal justice for everybody, I believe in impartiality,” Brobson said.
McCullough, an originalist and conservative, also pointed to her judicial record as evidence of how she would rule in the future, if elected to the state Supreme Court.
“Look at our cases more than our registration, but the registration does reflect that I’m a conservative on the issues. I am still fair and impartial, and uphold the rule of the law and the Constitutions in every case that comes before me. I have worked very hard and very emotionally to do that,” McCullough said.
McLaughlin, the lone Democrat up for election, said her political affiliation spoke to her family’s immigrant roots and hard-working nature.
“I am a Democrat because my father always told me that the Democrats put food on our table. So at a young age, that’s what I knew and that’s how I grew up, with Democratic values. I look at myself, if you want to see what to infer, you can infer that Judge McLaughlin comes from a family of hard-working immigrants, Judge McLaughlin was the first one in her family to attend college,” McLaughlin stated.
Patrick, who said she switched her political affiliation from Democrat to Republican in 2009, championed her conservative beliefs and diverse professional background, in her quest for a seat on the state’s highest court.
“Voters should take away the fact that I really have the most diverse background of anyone here. The other thing the voters can infer from me is this: As a judge, whether I was elected as a Republican or Democrat, I don’t believe that politics, public opinion or money should have any bearing on a judge’s decision. A judge should not be swayed by any of those things,” Patrick said.
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com