DV Journal

The state Supreme Court declined to hear a mail-in ballot signature case last year, believing it was too close to the November 2024 election. Now that the election is over, the high court has taken up an appeal regarding Baxter v. Philadelphia Board of Elections.

The case was brought by Brian Baxter and Susan Kinniry, two Philadelphia voters whose ballots were rejected by the Philadelphia Board of Elections because they lacked signatures  with dates as required by state law.

Two lower courts sided with the plaintiffs. Republicans have appealed to the Supreme Court.

After the November election, Bucks County Commissioners Diane Ellis-Marseglia and Bob Harvie created a bruhaha by voting to count mail-in ballots sans the required signatures. Ellis-Marseglia famously said, “I think we all know that precedent by a court doesn’t matter anymore in this country. People violate laws any time they want. So, for me, if I violate this law, it’s because I want a court to pay attention to it.”

The Montgomery County commissioners also voted to ignore the law.

The ACLUPA and the Public Interest Law Center are representing the plaintiffs.

“This case is about an unconstitutional rule that needlessly disenfranchises thousands,” said Stephen Loney, senior supervising attorney at the ACLU of Pennsylvania. “Court ruling after court ruling has found that a handwritten date, or lack thereof, on the outer envelope of a mail ballot, has no bearing on whether the voter is eligible or returned their ballot by the deadline.

“Counties should be doing all they can to ensure that every eligible voter can cast their ballot and that every vote is counted. Disqualifying ballots over the lack of a handwritten date is plainly unconstitutional,” he said.

But Republican election lawyer Linda Kerns said the state legislature, not the courts, should be making the law.

“The issue is that election laws should be changed via the legislative process – not the courts. The court will now address the merits of the challenge under the Free and Fair Elections Clause – which it has already upheld in previous cases and should do so yet again – respecting the plain language of the Pennsylvania General Assembly’s duly passed law. The General Assembly decided to include a commonsense requirement that voters record the date that they signed their ballot,” said Kerns.

“If the left wants to change that, it should be through the General Assembly,” she added.

In 2019, the Pennsylvania legislature passed Act 77 to permit mail-in ballots, and the practice has been the subject of controversy and litigation ever since. Republican voters had remained tepid about mail-in voting, but Democrats adopted it enthusiastically.

For the 2024 election the RNC and Republican leaders, including President Donald Trump, pushed their voters to vote by mail, increasing their voters’ buy-in.

Scott Presler, the GOP voting registration activist who helped flip several Pennsylvania county voter rolls from Democratic to Republican majority–ultimately helping elect President-elect Donald Trump–now has a new target: the state Supreme Court.

Sometimes known as the ‘Pied Piper of GOP voter registration,’ Presler is campaigning to get MAGA voters to vote against retaining three Democratic state Supreme Court justices: Christine Donohue, David N. Wecht, and Kevin M. Dougherty. Voters will decide whether to keep them on the bench in 2025.

Dougherty, a member of a Philadelphia political dynasty, is the brother of disgraced labor leader Johnny “Doc” Dougherty and the father of newly elected state Rep. Sean Dougherty (D-Philadelphia).

And it’s not just that they’re Democrats, Presler told DVJournal. Presler, who moved from Virginia to western Pennsylvania to help elect Trump, said the votes of these three jurists made real differences in people’s lives.

And not in a good way.

In 2020, the Democratic majority court voted to uphold former Gov. Tom Wolf’s pandemic lockdowns, he said. That resulted in the people voting for a referendum in 2021 to curb a governor’s emergency powers.

That same year, the court voted to allow mail-in ballots not received until three days after the election to be counted, Presler said. The law now requires ballots to arrive by 8 p.m. on Election Day.

He called those “awful decisions.”

Presler has rehired 23 people who worked for his nonprofit, Early Vote Action, during the 2024 election. They will now work to convince voters not to retain the Democratic justices. Billionaire Elon Musk, a Trump supporter, gave Early Vote Action $1 million in August.

“In recent history, there has only been one Supreme Court Justice [Russell M. Nigro] to lose a retention vote, and that was way back after the whole pay raise hullabaloo (in 2005),” said Republican political consultant Christopher Nicholas. “If those three are not retained by voters in the fall, then their terms would end at the end of 2025, and then the governor would have to appoint three replacements to serve until the next regularly scheduled judicial election, which would be 2027. Of course, the Senate would have to confirm those appointments.”

Nicholas said that Wecht, Donohue and Dougherty have until early January to tell the secretary of state whether they want to stand for retention.

“And so my message is, if Pennsylvanians want a different court, make a plan to vote on Tuesday, Nov. 4, 2025,” said Presler. “And then to vote for conservative justices in 2027. If you do all these things, you could have a 5 to 2 Republican majority on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court going into the 2028 presidential election.”

Will Pennsylvania voters understand this relatively complex process, as opposed to a single up-or-down vote to keep or remove an elected official?

“I want people to know there is a plan in place, and ultimately, if every Trump supporter comes out in 2025, 2026, and 2027, you will keep winning. That’s the ultimate message. You keep coming out [to vote], you keep winning. Period.”

Presler said he has not discussed this judicial campaign with Musk.

“I think Elon’s a little busy working on the Department of Government Efficiency,” said Presler. “And building rocket ships and providing free speech [on X] rather than messing with little Scott Presler right now.”

Presler noted that after past elections, the Republican Party “tended to pack up and go home, after celebrating a victory lap, and just kind of rested on their laurels.

“Now, we’re already staffed, and we’re already preparing for 2025,” he said. “We don’t want to make the same mistakes.”

Early Vote Action has also moved into the blue state next door to help a Republican win the governor’s race in New Jersey.

“We showed people you can win the commonwealth,” said Presler. “You can win a Senate seat. You can flip two congressional seats from blue to red. And Pennsylvania is the only swing state that delivered a Senate seat. Arizona didn’t. Wisconsin didn’t. Nevada didn’t. Pennsylvania did.”

“And so with that credibility, I’ve already told people, ‘Hey, Tuesday, Nov. 4, 2025, mark your calendars, and you get everybody out to vote.’

“We’re investing early. I know yard signs don’t vote, but I think, especially in an off-year election, you’re going to see Early Vote Action [put up] our ‘Vote No on Retention’ signs.”

“Victory begets victory,” said Presler. “I think the Democrats are truly very demoralized. They’re licking their wounds…We’re fired up. We want to keep winning. We’ll make Pennsylvania the next Ohio.”

“We’re going to keep registering voters,” said Presler. “We’re going to keep showing up at farmers’ markets and gun shows. The days of Republicans not being 24/7, 365 are over.”

Commissioner Diane Ellis-Marseglia, we thank you. On behalf of those of us who support the rule of law, and those of us who were trying to get Pennsylvanians—and even our fellow Americans—to pay attention to the games being played by Bob Casey and his activist lawyers, we sincerely thank you.

After the multi-year, multi-billion dollar campaign ended on Nov. 5, voters were exhausted. Most people wanted a break from politics—many activists, too. There was still vote counting to be done—lawyers’ never-ending ballot challenges; election board hearings; and, appeals over mail-in ballots’ signatures and dates (or, lack thereof), machine errors and, the now infamous “provisional ballots” issued on Election Day.

Who but the nerdiest of election nerds, lawyers, or activists pays attention to that dull, drawn-out process? No one. But, not any more. Thanks, Diane!

As Bob Casey’s lawyers—who parachuted in from D.C. and across America—were making illogical and illegal arguments across our state, especially before Democrat-run Boards of Election (aka County Commissioners) in Allegheny, Montgomery, Centre, Philadelphia, and in Bucks County, Dave McCormick’s supporters and attorneys were trying to get the legacy media, and their GOP colleagues across Pennsylvania to notice. They were trying to get the RNC and the Trump-Vance team to notice.

And, then…Commissioner Diane Ellis-Marseglia, sitting high-atop her commissioner’s chair, atop her ruling dais, proclaimed to the audience, and everyone watching on social media, loudly, proudly and arrogantly: “We all know that precedent by a court doesn’t matter anymore in this country and people violate laws any time they want. So for me, if I violate a law, it’s because I want a court to pay attention…”

Again, thank you, Diane. You showed your arrogance, your elitism, and how out of touch many leftwing politicians have become. In her speech, she embodied the mindset that harkens back to the COVID-era: “I’m in charge and I get to make the rules.”

Now, Pennsylvanians, and most Americans know that Bob Casey is allowing leftwing activist-attorneys to make ridiculous, illogical and illegal arguments. To not only try to change the outcome of this election, but to tilt the scales for Democrats in 2026.

Ellis-Marseglia took the boring process of counting votes and arguing over the election code and brought it to light—better than any law professor and TV analyst.

Since election night, Casey attorneys have argued, with a straight face, for election boards and judges to ignore clearly-written Pennsylvania Election law. Casey’s lawyers argued for: ballots to be counted even when the “voter” isn’t registered to vote; for mail-in ballots with no voter signature; for mail-in ballots with no date or the wrong date; and, for ballots cast by voters in one county, yet they live in another.

Most county boards of election rejected these arguments—often unanimously. Some, voted to accept many of those ballots—often over the objection of the Republican Commissioner.

But, Diane must have heard what was happening in Pittsburgh and Norristown, in Philadelphia and State College—and, thought: “Hold my beer!”

She was going to accept these ballots—in violation of the statute and in clear violation of Supreme Court cases ruling that such ballots shall Not be counted. Plus, she had to give a speech to draw attention to her vote. She wanted to proclaim that she knew she was violating the law: She. Just. Didn’t. Care!

Then, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled, again—this time on her actions, and those of her colleagues. They left no doubt. The Court ruled—with its share of ALL CAPS— that the ballots shall Not be counted.

Democrat Justice David Wecht of Allegheny County issued a separate opinion to underscore his frustration, quoting the late US Justice Felix Frankfurter: “If one man can be allowed to determine for himself what the law is, every man can. That means first chaos, then tyranny. The greater the power that defies the law the less tolerant this Court be of defiance.”

As they say on Twitter/X: “Boom!”

Commissioner Diane Ellis-Marseglia reminded the taxpayers of Bucks County who she is—and, what she thinks of the law, and them.

All too often, county commissioners—or township supervisors or school board members—act outside of the spotlight. We don’t notice what they do. Until…

The Chester County Democrat Commissioners and their colleagues serving as the Prison Board came to light when their lax security allowed the now infamous convicted murderer, Danilo Cavalcante, to escape. And, their arrogance kept them from notifying the public for hours. That offered us into a window into how un-seriously they take criminal justice—and, how unaccountable they feel to voters.

The same for the school board members who yelled at parents during COVID.

It’s amazing what local officials will do and say when they think no one is watching, or, when they think they’re untouchable.

Ellis-Marseglia pulled the veil back in Bucks County. Now, we all will watch how votes are counted. Very closely.

As for elections, I live by three principles: Easy to vote. Hard to cheat. Results we can trust. Casey’s lawyers and Ellis-Marseglia tried to take away points two and three.

Now, all of America knows that they don’t really respect the law—or the voters.

We’ll be watching from now on. Thank you, Diane.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court landed yet another blow against Democrat U.S. Sen. Bob Casey’s hope of overturning his defeat at the hands of his Republican challenger.

The court ruled 4-3 in favor of Dave McCormick’s request to reject undated mail ballots.

“[M]ail-in and absentee ballots that fail to comply with the requires of the Pennsylvania Election Code SHALL NOT BE COUNTED for purposes of the election held on November 5, 2024,” the justices ruled Monday.

McCormick, the Pennsylvania Republican Party, and the Republican National Committee invoked the court’s rarely-used King’s Bench Power. The authority allows the Supreme Court to consider “any case pending in a lower court.”

The court ordered that all Boards of Elections in the state, “including … in Bucks County, Montgomery County, and Philadelphia County, SHALL COMPLY with the prior rulings of this Court.”

It wasn’t a surprise. On Nov. 1, a unanimous Supreme Court stayed a late October ruling by the Commonwealth Court that said 69 undated and incorrectly dated absentee and mail-in ballots in a Philadelphia special election could be counted.

McCormick’s lead over incumbent Casey was almost 18,000 votes in unofficial tallies. And while both the Associated Press and DecisionDeskHQ have called the race for McCormick, Casey has refused to concede. He declined to waive his right for a recount last week. That should be completed by Nov. 27.

Adding fuel to the fire were decisions by Democrats in Bucks and Montgomery Counties to validate undated or incorrectly dated ballots – even though they admitted to ignoring the state Supreme Court.

“I think we all know that precedent by a court doesn’t matter anymore in this country. People violate laws anytime they want. So, for me, if I violate this law, it’s because I want a court to pay attention,” said Bucks County Commission Chair Diane Ellis-Marseglia last week during a meeting.

Ellis-Marseglia donated $600 to Casey’s campaign in September.

Republicans said Monday they could ask for legal action against Ellis-Marseglia and other Democrats who flouted the ruling.

Supreme Court Justice Kevin Brobson appeared to acknowledge Ellis-Marseglia’s statements in his concurring opinion Monday on the ballot decision.

“Indeed, this Court has held that administrative agencies, like county boards of elections, lack the authority to declare unconstitutional the very statutes from which they derive their existence and which they are charged to enforce,” Republican Brobson wrote.

Fellow Republican Justice Sallie Mundy and Democrat Justice David Wecht joined Brobson’s concurrence.

Democrat Justice Kevin Dougherty also ruled in favor of McCormick, but did not issue a statement. On Nov. 1, Dougherty heaped scorn on the Commonwealth Court for its decision on undated ballots. He accused it of changing the electoral game “on the very eve of the election” after mail ballots had been shipped and returned. He noted voters, boards of elections, and election workers were already advised on “the handling of undated and misdated ballots.”

Other Democrat justices were not convinced.

Justice Christine Donohue wrote she was “unpersuaded” by Republican arguments over the flawed ballots. She wanted the ballots to be challenged through the courts of common pleas, as written in the Election Code.

Donohue voted in favor of staying the Commonwealth Court’s decision on undated ballots on Nov. 1.

McCormick’s campaign hailed the ruling.

“[It’s] a massive setback to Sen. Casey’s attempt to count illegal ballots. Bucks County and others blatantly violated the law in an effort to help Sen. Casey. Sen.-elect McCormick is very pleased with this ruling and looks forward to taking the oath of office in a few short weeks,” said Elizabeth Gregory, McCormick communications director.

She later told DVJournal all justices agreed with McCormick on the merits.

Gov. Josh Shapiro said, “As I have made clear for years, every eligible Pennsylvanian’s vote should be counted in every race – and thanks to the hard work of Republican and Democratic election officials all across the commonwealth, Pennsylvania has held another free, fair, safe, and secure election.

“As counties continued counting ballots from the 2024 general election and a mandatory statewide recount begins in the U.S. Senate race, they were confronted with a lack of legal clarity surrounding undated mail-in ballots that caused significant confusion and put counties in a challenging legal position. Both my predecessor and I have repeatedly called on lawmakers to deliver greater clarity on mail-in voting – and due to certain legislative actors refusing to act on critical election reforms, this issue had been left to the courts,” Shapiro said.

“Given this lack of clarity, county officials in each of our 67 counties were damned if they did and damned if they didn’t – likely facing legal action no matter which decision they made on counting.”

Shapiro expects county officials “to adhere to this ruling and all the applicable laws governing our elections.”

“As we move forward, I want to be clear: any insinuation that our laws can be ignored or do not matter is irresponsible and does damage to faith in our electoral process. The rule of law matters in this commonwealth, and as I have always said, it is critical for counties and officials in both parties to respect it with both their rhetoric and their actions. As governor, I will continue working to protect our democracy and the votes of all eligible Pennsylvanians – and we will continue to have free, fair, safe, secure elections in our commonwealth.”

The Casey campaign has not commented.

Earlier in the day, Casey campaign manager Tiernan Donohue accused Republicans of trying to disenfranchise voters and vowed  to keep fighting. “Sen. Casey is fighting to ensure Pennsylvanians’ voices are heard and to protect their right to participate in our democracy – just like he has done throughout his entire career,” she said.

PennLive.com also published an article from Casey that claimed the debate was “about the constitutionality of disenfranchising thousands of voters due to a requirement that has no bearing on a voters’ eligibility and has no impact in deterring fraud.”

It’s the eighth time an automatic recount will happen in a Pennsylvania election since 2004, according to Secretary of the Commonwealth Al Schmidt’s office and the second involving McCormick. He lost to Mehmet Oz two years ago in the GOP U.S. Senate primary.

McCormick was in Washington, D.C. last week for U.S. Senate orientation.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court dismissed the impeachment case against controversial Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner, ruling the effort died with the legislative session that launched it.

In the majority opinion, Chief Justice Deborah Todd wrote that because the legislature that impeached Krasner adjourned on Nov. 30, 2022 — before the state Senate held a trial — the opportunity to try Krasner on those impeachment charges had passed.

Rep. Martina White (R-Philadelphia), who introduced the articles of impeachment in the House, expressed disappointment at the high court’s decision.

“Like far too many of the criminals his office prosecutes, Larry Krasner today avoided his trial on the basis of a technicality,” said White. “Krasner has never denied the allegations against him. Instead, his defense has been simply the legislature can’t do anything about it. This ruling does not mean that is true, and today all Philadelphians – and Mr. Krasner – were denied a day in court to make their case. He cannot claim his innocence, as that trial has not yet happened.”

Republicans have long been outraged by the progressive policies practiced by Krasner, declining to prosecute some crimes and making it easier for criminal suspects to get back on the streets.

“Mr. Krasner has proven himself derelict in his duties as district attorney in Philadelphia, inappropriately using prosecutorial discretion to act against the public interest by consistently dropping charges against repeat offenders, refusing to prosecute certain crimes outright, while also withdrawing and dismissing charges under the Uniform Firearms Act at an abnormally high rate,” White said when making her case against the Philadelphia Democrat during the impeachment hearings.

Though many residents and law enforcement officers complained Krasner’s policies have made the city less safe, Philadelphia voters reelected him. And Krasner has signaled that he plans to seek a third term.

Lead Impeachment Manager Rep. Craig Williams (R-Chester/Delaware) and fellow Impeachment Manager Rep. Tim Bonner (R-Mercer/Butler) also commented.

“Today the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled the House of Representatives is without constitutional authority to proceed with the impeachment articles from a previous session,” said Williams. “It is important to note the court did not answer if the allegations of misbehavior in office met the constitutional standard for impeachment and conviction for the same. Those questions must be resolved by the Supreme Court. The rule of law and the public’s confidence in the criminal justice system requires it.”

The impeachment articles were primarily based on allegations of false statements and omissions to state and federal courts about certain cases. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court did not address the merits of the allegations against Krasner, instead dismissing the case on the procedural basis that impeachment proceedings initiated by the House cannot carry over into a new legislative session without reauthorization, they said.

Erica Clayton Wright, spokeswomen for Senate President Pro Tempore Kim Ward (R-Westmoreland) said, “Despite our efforts to demonstrate that impeachment has always been understood to survive the end of the legislative term, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that the ‘continuing body’ language of those precedents are no longer valid.”

“With that understanding, the rules of impeachment are clearly outlined in the Pennsylvania Constitution in Article 6, Section 5, ‘all impeachments shall be tried by the Senate.’ As such, in the future, the Senate will take up the Articles of Impeachment passed in the same legislative session by the House of Representatives and sit in judgment and review the evidence presented by the House to support the impeachment as outlined in the Pennsylvania constitution.”

A statement from Krasner’s office declared the decision “a victory for democracy and for the citizens of Philadelphia.”

Please follow DVJournal on social media: X@DVJournal or Facebook.com/DelawareValleyJournal

Democrats kept their hold on Delaware Valley county politics, sweeping local elections Tuesday and contributing to a good night for their party across the commonwealth. And voters elected Judge Daniel McCaffrey, also a Democrat, to fill a vacancy on the state’s Supreme Court.

The Republicans in Bucks, Montgomery, and Delaware Counties ran on the issue of public safety, pointing out that crime is increasing in the suburbs. But that issue did not convince voters. In Chester County, Republicans attempted to use the escape and two-week manhunt of convicted murderer Danilo Cavalcante to tar Democrats in charge of the county as incompetent.

In Bucks County, incumbent Democratic Commissioners Bob Harvie and Diane Ellis-Marseglia were challenged by incumbent Republican Gene DiGirolamo and Controller Pam Van Blunk.

With 100 percent of the precincts reporting, Ellis-Marseglia was ahead at 27.67 percent, followed by Harvie at 25.53 percent. DiGirolamo had 24.01 percent and Van Blunk garnered 22.74 percent.

In Chester County, Democratic incumbent Commissioners Josh Maxwell and Moskowitz faced Republicans Eric Roe and David Sommers. With all precincts reporting in, Maxwell and Moskowitz were each ahead at 28.33 and 27.75 percent, respectively.  While Roe was ahead of Sommers at 23.02 percent to 20.86 percent for the minority board seat.

In Delaware County, three incumbent Democrat Council Members, Monica Taylor, Ph.D., Elaine Paul Schaeffer and Christine Reuther, were challenged by GOP candidates Joy Schwartz, Jeff Jones and Bill Dennon, the Upland Borough mayor. With 100 percent of the precincts reporting, the Democrats retained their seats on the five-person council. And incumbent DA Jack Stollsteimer bested Republican challenger  Beth Stefanide-Miscichowski.

Chester will also have a new mayor. Democrat City Councilman Stefan Roots bested Independent Anita J. Littlejohn. Roots defeated outgoing Mayor Thaddeus Kirkland in the Democratic primary earlier this year.

Judge Carolyn Carluccio with her husband, Tom Carluccio and son, Joseph, walk to the Wissahickon Valley Library in Skippack to vote.

In Montgomery County, incumbent Commissioner Jamila Winder and candidate Neil Makhija, both Democrats, bested Republicans Liz Ferry and Tom DiBello. With all votes counted, DiBello was ahead of Ferry by 85,934 votes to 83,811 for the seat reserved for the minority commissioner.

In Philadelphia, where her party holds a 7-1 voter registration advantage, Democrat Cherelle Parker easily defeated David Oh to become the first Black woman mayor of the city. And Republicans appear to have lost one of their two remaining City Council seats to the leftwing populist Working Families Party. The only GOP holdout was Councilman Brian O’Neill who won re-election to the 10th District.

Statewide, the marquee race was for an opening on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.  Republican Judge Carolyn Carluccio, president judge for Montgomery County, lost to Superior Court Judge Dan McCaffrey.

A relentless spate of negative television commercials pummeled voters in the weeks leading up to Election Day, along with internet ads and mailings. The race was pricy, too.  About $17 million was spent, with outside groups including unions, lawyers, and others pumping in cash. Democrats made abortion, an issue that worked for them in 2022, again the centerpiece of their argument.

Charlie Gerow, a GOP consultant with Quantum Communications, said, “The results of the Supreme Court race are especially troubling. Not winning that seat means that Democrats will likely control that Court for the rest of my life. Equally troubling were the at -large Council seats in Philadelphia that Republicans failed to win. The system was not designed to have no GOP representation, but that is what we have for the first time in modern history.”

“One bright spot was the re-election of Steve Zappala (for district attorney) in Allegheny County who won as a Republican over a Larry Krasner style Democrat,” Gerow added.

Carluccio sent this concession statement: “I just spoke with Judge McCaffery.  The people have spoken, and while the outcome was not what we hoped for, the democratic process has once again prevailed. I want to express my deepest gratitude to my supporters for your time and your belief in our vision for a fair and impartial judiciary.

I congratulate my opponent on his victory and wish him the wisdom and strength to uphold the great responsibility that comes with serving on our State Supreme Court. It is my hope that he will serve the interests of justice and the well-being of all Pennsylvanians at heart.

To all who have stood by me, know that our efforts have not been in vain. We have sparked important conversations and advocated for the values we hold dear. I remain committed to serving our community and upholding the rule of law as President Judge of the Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas.”

McCaffrey’s win will bring the high court back to a 5-2 Democratic majority.

Montgomery County President Judge Carolyn Carluccio has been in all 67 Pennsylvania counties, some more than once, as she campaigns for a seat on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. It is part of her strategy to outwork her opponent in the upcoming election.

And, she told DVJournal as she traveled to Pittsburgh, it comes with an added benefit.

“It’s such a beautiful state,” said Carluccio. “All the undeveloped land, the mountains, the valleys.”

Carluccio is running against Superior Court Judge Daniel Caffery (D) for the seat previously held by Justice Max Baer, who died last September. And while the Pennsylvania scenery is pretty, the politics isn’t.

Carluccio is being attacked by the Planned Parenthood Votes political action committee, which runs television ads claiming she would do away with abortion in the state.

“It’s fascinating to me when I say I will follow the law. It has made my opponents a little bit crazy,” said Carluccio. “I’ve been very consistent about that. The law in Pennsylvania is that abortion is legal up until 24 weeks. I will apply (that law)  because that’s my job. I’m not going to change anything. But for some reason, they are insistent on saying things that are not true. The reality is abortion is not even relevant to this race. It will never get before us because in order for abortion to get before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, it needs to get through a pro-life legislature and a pro-choice governor. That would be very challenging. So I don’t ever see it coming before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.”

“It’s really simple,” she said. “I am a judge who understands her role is to follow the law and to uphold our constitution. And that’s as simple as it gets.”

Carluccio is a Montgomery County native.

“I was born in Norristown and grew up right outside Norristown, in West Norriton,” she said. “I’ve always wanted to work with people and help people. And I found the law was an avenue for that.”

“I also had an uncle (Judge Joseph Smyth) who was a big influence on my life and was a lawyer,” she said. “He was my mom’s (Dorothy) younger brother. He was a football player for Notre Dame. He would babysit for my sister and me, and we thought he was pretty cool. And he became a very young district attorney in Montgomery County.”

Gov. Dick Thornburgh appointed Smyth to the court “at a very young age.”

“And the cool part is he is still on the Montgomery County bench with me. He’s in his last year as a senior judge. It’s been wonderful. He’s so smart and kind, and he’s been a great role model for me.”

Before she was elected to the Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas in 2009, Carluccio was an Assistant U.S. Attorney, prosecuting drug dealers, bank robbers, and money launderers. She was Montgomery County’s first woman chief public defender and its first woman chief deputy solicitor.

She has served in the family, criminal, and civil divisions on the court. Last year, all the judges on the court unanimously voted for her to be the president judge. She is the first woman to hold that position.

“I’ve done public service my entire career,” said Carluccio. “It’s what I love.”

She was elected president of the Montgomery Bar Association in her second year on the bench.

Following in her uncle’s footsteps, she “was thrilled to be president judge in Montgomery County. That was really the ultimate goal I had set for myself. But then people came to me and said, ‘You’re the perfect person for this (to serve on the state Supreme Court).’”

She declined at first but was asked again. So, she talked to her husband and uncle, and they “right away said, ‘This is an opportunity you need to take. You’d be perfect for this. And not everybody gets this opportunity.’”

Pennsylvania GOP Chairman Lawrence Tabas said of Carluccio, “She is unbelievable. She’s been all over the state. This is a person who was elected president judge unanimously by her fellow judges, most of whom are Democrats. The vilification of her by people on the Left is so misplaced.”

Liz Preate Havey, a lawyer and the secretary of the state GOP, said, “Judge Carluccio is extremely well regarded in the legal community across the state and recognized as such by the Pennsylvania Bar Association when it highly recommended her for Supreme Court and the Pennsylvania State Trial Judges when it recently elected her as its president. The campaign attacks on her by Democrats are patently false and really an attack on the judiciary itself. It’s proof that Judge Carluccio is the best candidate for the Supreme Court.”

“I have a lot of empathy,” Carluccio said. “I’m a very good listener. And those qualities have certainly helped me at this level. But the one quality I think is most remarkable, and the one that is most important is the fact that I follow the law, even when I don’t like it. And even when I don’t agree with it because that’s my job. I will not be an activist judge.”

If elected, she would be the only justice from the suburbs. There are four from cities: one from Philadelphia and three from Pittsburgh. Two are from rural counties.

Also, it would be the first time in state history that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court would be majority female, she said. The court now has two Republicans and four Democrats, so Carluccio’s election would not change the court majority.

“And there has not been an Italian American up there in 20 years,” she said.

When she’s not working, Carluccio loves to read and belongs to two book clubs.

“I probably listen to five books a month,” she said. She also enjoys exercising and attends a 6:15 a.m. boot camp all year.

“Those women are my rocks,” Carluccio said. “Girlfriends and family—not in that order—are very important to me.”

Carluccio went to Marshall Street Elementary in Norristown, then to Germantown Academy in Fort Washington, before earning her B.A. from Dickinson College and her J.D. from Widener University.

Carluccio and her husband, Tom, live in Blue Bell and have three grown children: Andrew, Charlie, and Joseph.

Please follow DVJournal on social media: Twitter@DVJournal or Facebook.com/DelawareValleyJournal

Two Republican state representatives filed an amicus brief to oppose the city of Chester’s bid to sell Chester Water Authority to Aqua PA.

The case is expected to be heard by the state Supreme Court on Nov. 30.

“Act 73 of 2012 abolished Chester city’s control over the CWA board. It is outrageous to suggest that years later, the city can override the clear intent of the Legislature, take control of CWA and sell it to the highest bidder.  I am grateful that the Supreme Court has agreed to review this matter, and I will continue to fight to prevent any takeover of Chester Water Authority,” said Rep. John Lawrence (R-West Grove).

Lawrence, whose constituents in Chester and Delaware counties are served by CWA filed the brief with House Speaker Bryan Cutler (R-Lancaster).

“The CWA board has steadfastly and responsibly served the hundreds of thousands of customers who rely on this municipally provided service,” Cutler said. “The Commonwealth Court’s ruling undermines the board’s rightful position to continue to recognize the best interest of its customers and sets a dangerous precedent for all water consumers in the Commonwealth. We strongly urge the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to take a closer look at this case.”

Previously, CWA rejected an unsolicited $320 million takeover offer in 2017. Subsequent lawsuits focused on whether the CWA Board or the city of Chester has the ultimate authority to approve a sale of the water authority. A Delaware County court decided in favor of CWA, but on appeal t the Commonwealth Court reversed the lower court’s ruling.

Founded in 1939, Chester Water Authority serves over 200,000 customers in Chester and Delaware counties. In addition to water treatment facilities, the authority owns and operates the Octoraro Reservoir, and water pipelines connecting the reservoir with the Susquehanna River and facilities in the city of Chester.

A spokesperson for Aqua, which made a $410 million bid for the system, declined to comment since the matter is in litigation.

Aqua and other privately owned corporations have been buying area water and sewer systems after a law signed in 2016 permitted them to pay “fair market value” for those public utilities.  However, residents have been organizing to fight back against these acquisitions, fearing higher rates. They have had some success, notably garnering public support to pressure the Bucks County Commissioners to oppose a planned deal for Aqua to buy the Bucks County Water & Sewer Authority for $1.1 billion.

In the brief, the lawmakers noted that the takeover jeopardizes the reservoir, which Cutler’s constituents enjoy.

The representatives argue in their brief that the City of Chester does not have the right to decide on the sale without the consent of Delaware and Chester counties, which are also represented on the CWA board.

Frank Catania, a lawyer for CWA, said the CWA board members terms are up in November. The Chester County commissioners reappointed two board members on Wednesday, Noel Brandon and Leonard Rivera, along with Erik Walschburger, deputy county administrator as a new board member.

On Thursday, the CWA board will hold a special meeting to discuss whether to join the U.S. Water Alliance and its One Water Program. That group promotes sustainable fresh water and holistic water management, according to its website.

Please follow DVJournal on social media: Twitter@DVJournal or Facebook.com/DelawareValleyJournal

The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in the Dobbs case, which returned abortion policy decisions to individual states, has sparked an important public policy discussion about what limits on abortion are appropriate. Most Americans are willing to have reasonable discussions about reasonable limits on abortion.

But some politicians have sought to take advantage of the heightened sensitivity of the issue, spreading false, misleading claims for personal political gain. My opponent is one of them and I want to set the record straight: I have never voted in support of an abortion ban. And if a ban were ever advanced in Pennsylvania, I would oppose it.

The Dobbs decision has fueled efforts by both supporters and opponents of abortion to vastly change state abortion laws. In West Virginia, some have pushed for aggressive bans on abortion with limited exceptions. Meanwhile, some pro-choice advocates are championing efforts to vastly expand abortion access into the third trimester. Pennsylvania House Democratic Policy Committee hearing this summer featured panelists who championed eliminating all abortion restrictions. As one panelist stated, “every abortion restriction is extreme.”

There are also efforts currently underway through the courts to overturn a 30-year-old Pennsylvania law that prohibits the use of taxpayer funding to perform abortions. It provides exceptions for rape, incest, and to protect the life of the mother. This case, Allegheny Reproductive Health Center vs. the Pennsylvania Department of Human Services, is now before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. The appellants are asking the state’s majority Democratic Supreme Court to establish a state constitutional right to taxpayer-funded abortions. In its ruling, the court could also establish a state constitutional right to abortion, removing all abortion restrictions and allowing abortions to be performed up until the moment of birth.

Following the Dobbs decision, I’ve had extensive conversations with many constituents about what constitutes reasonable abortion access and restrictions. It is clear to me that the vast majority of residents hold moderate, middle-of-the-ground views. Many who consider themselves “pro-choice” believe if a woman plans to have an abortion, she should do it before the child would be viable outside the womb. Conversely, many who consider themselves “pro-life” support allowing abortions up until 20 weeks.

What I’ve learned is that most local residents do not support an abortion ban, nor do they support proposals promoted by Planned Parenthood and others to eliminate all abortion limitations. Most fall in the middle: Supporting both protecting a woman’s right to choose in the early stages of pregnancy and the government’s ability to protect life once it would be viable outside the womb.

Abortion in Pennsylvania is governed by the Abortion Control Act of 1982, which allows abortions to be performed up until 24 weeks for any reason, except to select the sex of the baby. There are additional exceptions after 24 weeks, such as to protect the life of the mother.

The proposed Pennsylvania constitutional amendment approved by the legislature this summer, S.B. 106, clarifies that it is entirely within the purview of the legislature to regulate abortion. For the constitutional amendment to take effect, it needs to again pass the legislature next legislative session. Pennsylvania voters would then approve or disapprove of it in a statewide referendum.

My opponent’s claim that the proposed amendment bans abortion is an outright lie. The amendment makes no change to the Abortion Control Act, nor does it further restrict access to abortion. On the contrary, I supported the amendment to maintain the status quo and prevent a Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision that invalidates current law, removes all abortion restrictions, and creates a constitutional right to taxpayer-funded abortions.

That is why the amendment is worded the way it is. “This constitution does not grant the right to taxpayer-funded abortion or any other right relating to abortion.” It does not ban abortion in Pennsylvania. It preserves current law and the ability of the legislature to establish reasonable restrictions.

This is a deeply personal public policy discussion. As elected officials, we must work to achieve a public consensus on the topic through open, honest discourse. Politicians on both sides of the abortion issue who spread inflammatory rhetoric are doing a great disservice to voters.

As a member of the House of Representatives, my job is to represent the views of the residents of my district. As such, I will not support any legislation that would either expand or ban access to abortion. This is not a public policy we should rush into until such time as a public consensus is achieved.

Please follow DVJournal on social media: Twitter@DVJournal or Facebook.com/DelawareValleyJournal

The Pennsylvania state Supreme Court on Tuesday voted 7-2 to overturn a lower court ruling that found  Pennsylvania’s Act 77 violates the state’s constitution. In a recent Delaware Valley Journal podcast, veteran GOP operative Michael Caputo, an outspoken opponent of Act 77, explained why he believes the Supreme Court is putting partisan politics ahead of Pennsylvania law.

Caputo spoke before the Supreme Court’s ruling.

“The Supreme Court had hearings and then stayed the decision of the lower court, which basically overturned Act 77, (The Commonwealth Court) ruled it unconstitutional,” Caputo said. The Commonwealth Court “spelled it out very clearly,” he said.

Michael Caputo

“I worked with Doug McLinko, a county commissioner and an election official from Bradford County, on his challenge of the act,” said Caputo. “He was the primary…plaintiff on the lawsuit that overturned Act 77, which is the legislature-driven, no excuse mail-in ballots law that led to massive, massive use of mail-in ballots in Pennsylvania in 2020.”

While the Commonwealth Court found it unconstitutional because the constitution calls for “in-person voting,” with a few excuses for absentee voting, the state Supreme Court disagreed.

“The Commonwealth Court decision on Act 77 and McLinko v. Pennsylvania spelled it out and said, ‘Look, this is unconstitutional. But the voters in Pennsylvania appear to like no excuse, mail-in ballots, so they need to amend the constitution. Until the constitution is amended, this is going to remain unconstitutional,'” he said.

“I believe the state Supreme Court knows that and still wants the public to have no excuse mail-in balloting at their disposal for the general election,” said Caputo. “I, for the life of me, can’t see the technical reason why they would demand that and allow it. I do have my suspicions, of course.

“Many of the Republican state legislators took a long time to understand just how much they had tilted the entire election of the nation by writing this unconstitutional law in their own state. For many, many months, over a year, they could not take the blame for what they had done…The problem is we’re going to go through the midterm, I think, with no-excuse mail-in ballots because it took so long for any effective legislative fix.

“Act 77 needs to be repealed entirely,” Caputo said.  “And if the Democrats and even some Republicans want no excuse, mail-in ballots, they need to amend the constitution.  The problem is…there’s no way to pass a constitutional amendment to get mail-in ballots for the 2024 presidential election. It’s a conundrum for Democrats, including Democrats on the Supreme Court because they really want that ability to have no excuse mail-in ballots in the presidential (election) just two years from now.”

Asked if mail-in ballots were one reason former President Donald Trump lost Pennsylvania in 2020, Caputo said, “I do believe that. I’ve seen some reports done by Pennsylvania investigators, Pennsylvania lawyers, Wally Zimolong, the attorney on our case, makes a great case that this led to widespread fraud.”

Please follow DVJournal on social media: Twitter@DVJournal or Facebook.com/DelawareValleyJournal