The Texas Senate appointed a committee on May 29 to develop proposed rules for the upcoming impeachment proceeding against Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R). The committee, consisting of five Republicans and two Democrats, was directed to propose rules for the trial by June 20. The Senate also adopted a resolution on May 30 calling for Paxton’s trial to begin no later than August 28.
On May 29, the Texas House of Representatives appointed 12 impeachment managers—seven Republicans and five Democrats—to serve as prosecutors during Paxton’s Senate trial. The managers include all five members of the Texas House of Representatives General Investigating Committee that unanimously recommended Paxton’s impeachment on May 25.
The Texas House voted 121-23 to impeach Paxton on May 27. All of the chamber’s 61 Democrats and 60 Republicans voted in favor of the resolution, which listed 20 articles of impeachment. Republicans cast all 23 votes against impeachment.
Following the House vote impeaching him, Paxton said, “The ugly spectacle in the Texas House today confirmed the outrageous impeachment plot against me was never meant to be fair or just. It was a politically motivated sham from the beginning. … What we witnessed today is not just about me. It is about the corrupt establishment’s eagerness to overpower the millions of Texas voters who already made their voices heard when they overwhelmingly re-elected me.”
The House General Investigating Committee unanimously recommended Paxton’s impeachment on May 25 after beginning an investigation in March 2023. The Texas Tribune reported that four investigators for the House committee said during a public forum that they believed Paxton “broke numerous state laws, misspent office funds and misused his power to benefit a friend and political donor.” The 20 articles of impeachment included seven that were titled, “Disregard of official duty,” three titled, “False statements in official records,” and two each titled, “Constitutional bribery” and “Obstruction of justice.”
Paxton is the second statewide official, and the third overall, to be impeached in Texas history. Gov. James Ferguson (D) was impeached in 1917 and is the state’s only governor to be removed from office. Ferguson was indicted on nine charges, including misapplication of public funds, embezzlement, and the diversion of a special fund. In 1976, State District Judge O.P. Carillo was impeached and removed from office for “schem[ing] to take Duval County taxpayers’ money through phony equipment rentals.” Carillo spent three years in prison after being convicted of tax fraud.
Daniel McCaffery defeated Deborah Kunselman in the Democratic primary for one seat on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court on May 16. McCaffery will face Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio—who won the Republican primary—in the general election on Nov. 7.
McCaffery was elected to the Pennsylvania Superior Court in 2019. He is an Army veteran and worked as an attorney, an assistant district attorney in Philadelphia, and was first elected as a judge in Philadelphia in 2013. He campaigned on his experience. McCaffrey’s website said, “Assigned to one of the busiest trial divisions in Pennsylvania, Judge McCaffery presided over one hundred jury trials and thousands of bench trials…McCaffery is currently the supervising judge for wiretaps and was selected by the Supreme Court to serve on the Court of Judicial Discipline.”
Pennsylvania’s Democratic Party had endorsed McCaffery at a meeting of state party committee members on Jan. 29.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court is the state’s court of last resort. Justices run in partisan elections for 10-year terms. After a judge’s first term, he or she must run in a retention election to serve subsequent terms. The winner of this election will succeed Justice Max Baer (D), who passed away on Sept. 30, 2022. Baer’s term expired in 2023 and he was unable to run for re-election since Pennsylvania judges must retire at the end of the calendar year in which they reach 75 years of age.
The state supreme court can hear appeals from both statewide and local courts and can assume jurisdiction over any case in the Pennsylvania court system. Peter Hall of the Pittsburgh City Paper wrote, “The Supreme Court hears appeals in cases involving unsettled areas of the law, reviews all death penalty convictions, and has played the decisive role in redrawing Pennsylvania’s congressional districts in recent years.”
The partisan balance of the court changed as a result of the 2015 elections from a 4-3 Republican majority to a 5-2 Democratic majority when Justices Kevin M. Dougherty (D), David Wecht (D) and Christine Donohue (D) were elected to three open seats. The outcome of this election will not affect the court’s governing majority.
Kate Huangpu and Stephen Caruso wrote for Spotlight PA, “Justices elected as Democrats have been in the majority since 2015, and flipping the court back has been a top Republican priority since then. The seven-member court is currently composed of four Democrats and two Republicans.”
The most recent state supreme court election in Pennsylvania was in 2021, when Kevin Brobson (R) defeated Maria McLaughlin (D) in the general election, 52% to 48%. Brobson’s election did not change the partisan composition of the court since he succeeded Justice Thomas Saylor (R), who did not run for another term because he turned 75 in 2021.
The next scheduled state supreme court elections in Pennsylvania will take place in 2025 when the three Democratic justices first elected in 2015 will be up for re-election. Unless there are unexpected vacancies, 2025 is the first year that the partisan balance of the court can change from a Democratic to a Republican majority.
Kunselman was elected to the Pennsylvania Superior Court in 2017. She also worked as an attorney, a solicitor with Beaver County, and was first elected as a judge in Beaver County in 2006. Kunselman campaigned on her experience, saying she has “the most experience of any candidate for the Supreme Court with 17 years as a judge” and had “developed expertise in Civil, Family, Juvenile, and Criminal court.”
Before the primary, Spotlight PA‘s Kate Huangpu wrote: “The state’s primaries are closed, meaning only registered Democrats and Republicans can vote for candidates during these spring contests. (Unaffiliated and third-party voters can, however, vote on ballot questions, other referendums, and special elections during a primary.)”
Incumbent Michael Adams defeated two candidates—2015 Republican nominee Stephen Knipper and former state Rep. Allen Maricle—in the Republican primary for Kentucky secretary of state on May 16. Adams faces former state Rep. Charles Wheatley—the only candidate who ran for the Democratic nomination—in the general election on Nov. 7.
Adams was elected secretary of state in 2019, defeating Heather French Henry (D), 52% to 48%. He succeeded Alison Lundergan Grimes (D), who served two terms in the position from 2012 to 2020. Grimes was unable to run in 2019 due to term limits. Before Adams, the previous Republican secretary of state was Trey Grayson (R), who served from 2005 until 2012.
According to the state’s official website, the secretary of state is “responsible for business registration, preservation of state records, state election management, and other administrative, fiscal and personnel tasks.”
Adams received a bachelor’s degree from the University of Louisville and a law degree from Harvard University. He previously worked in Gov. Ernie Fletcher’s (R) administration, in the U.S. attorney general’s office during George W. Bush’s (R) presidency, and as an attorney specializing in election law. He served on the Kentucky State Board of Elections from 2016 to 2020. Adams stated why he was running on his website: “We’ve done more in 3 years to make it easy to vote and hard to cheat than our predecessors were able to do in 200 years…I do not take this race for granted, nor should anyone who wants fair, free, accessible and secure elections.”
Knipper is the chief of staff for Kentucky Lieutenant Govenor Jenean Hampton (R). He was the Republican nominee for secretary of state in 2015, losing to Lundergan Grimes (D) in the general election, 51% to 49%, and he finished third in the Republican primary for the office in 2019. Knipper received a bachelor’s degree from Northern Kentucky University and previously worked as a business analyst and project manager for The Cincinnati Insurance Companies and Catholic Health Initiatives. He said he ran because “The election concerns I have had for nearly a decade are now recurring national news. The election topic is not going away this time, so I am dedicating myself once again to address it.”
Maricle is a political and broadcast television consultant and served in the Kentucky House of Representatives from 1995 to 1999. Maricle received a bachelor’s degree from Sullivan University and previously worked as a sales manager for a magazine and several local television stations. Maricle said that he would “bring his extensive knowledge of elections and campaign finance to the forefront, and will work tirelessly to ensure that all citizens have the opportunity to participate in the democratic process.
Adams supported changes to Kentucky’s voting procedures during the coronavirus pandemic. Zach Montellaro of Politico wrote, “Kentucky earned measured praise from voting rights advocates for how it largely sidestepped the missing ballots, long lines and other problems faced by many states amid coronavirus. The Democratic governor and Republican secretary of state reached bipartisan agreement on a massive expansion of absentee voting, leading to the highest primary turnout in Kentucky since the hard-fought 2008 presidential primary.”
Adams also supported election administration legislation that Kentucky’s Republican-controlled General Assembly passed in 2021 and that Gov. Andy Beshear (D) signed into law. “House Bill 564…creates additional in-person voting days, adds protections for poll workers, and codifies our existing policy of not connecting the voting machines to the internet.” “Senate Bill 216…doubling the number of counties subject to post-election audit, moving up the full transition to paper ballots, and placing voting machines under video surveillance when not being used.”
Jane Timm of NBC News wrote that Knipper stated in 2021 that “Donald Trump won the 2020 election and that he personally saw hackers manipulate U.S. election results online.” Timm also said Knipper “criticized the supercenters and early voting codified in the 2021 law and fought against the use of electronic voting machines.
Maricle believed there was fraud in Kentucky’s 2022 general election and said he would make the following changes to the state’s voting processes: “Clean up the voter rolls. Eliminate the ERIC system…look into the voter machine process and give counties more options to choose from. Give back local control to the county clerk’s. Create an office called Election Integrity Task force to look into every election complaint and give prompt answers to the public.”
The state’s membership in the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC) was also an issue in the campaign. According to Timm, Adams “doesn’t want to remove the state from ERIC…[and] said ERIC is a helpful tool in election administration.” Both Knipper and Maricle have said that Kentucky should withdraw from ERIC.
Cherelle Parker defeated eight other candidates in the Democratic primary for mayor of Philadelphia on May 16. She faces David Oh—the only candidate who ran for the Republican nomination—in the general election on Nov. 7. Incumbent Jim Kenney (D) was first elected mayor in 2015 and was term-limited.
The city’s last 10 mayors were elected as Democrats. The last Republican to serve as mayor was Bernard Samuel, whose term ended in 1952.
Jeff Brown, Allan Domb, Helen Gym, Parker, and Rebecca Rhynhart had led the Democratic primary in fundraising and media mentions.
Parker was elected to the city council in 2016 and served until 2022 when she resigned to run for mayor. She began her political career as a city council staff member and served in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives from 2005 to 2016. Parker was elected the council’s majority leader in 2020. Her website said, “It was in this role where she focused on public safety, stabilizing “middle neighborhoods,” economic opportunity – especially for small businesses, and working to get city government to function like it should.”
In the three Philadelphia mayoral elections since 1999 that did not have an incumbent, the winner of the Democratic primary received a majority of the vote once—Kenney’s 56% in 2015. Michael Nutter won the Democratic primary in 2007 with 37% of the vote, and John Street won the Democratic primary in 1999 with 36% of the vote.
Before the primary, Anna Orso, Sean Collins Walsh, and Julia Terruso wrote in The Philadelphia Inquirer: “To be clear, all of the major candidates will likely get at least some votes from every pocket of the city. But winning candidates typically have a strong base that they build out from…Rhynhart and Gym are both vying for liberal Center City voters, and Domb and Brown both probably need strong margins in the Northeast if they are going to win. And don’t forget about turnout. While Parker appears to have little competition for establishment-aligned Black voters, their share of the electorate has decreased over time, meaning she, too, will have to expand beyond her base to be successful.”
Marcus Biddle at WHYY wrote before the election that, “Most candidates are making public health issues like gun violence a campaign priority. How they plan to solve those problems is another story…Improving major public health issues in Philadelphia — the gun violence crisis and the opioid epidemic among them — could be a deciding issue for many voters in the city’s mayoral race…As for the city’s gun violence crisis, most candidates agreed that improving and expanding access to behavioral health support, therapy, and trauma treatment is an urgent need.”
The filing deadline for the primary was March 8, and the filing deadline for the general election for independent candidates is Aug. 1.
After the 2020 census, California’s 40 state Senators represent an average of 989,419 people each. Each Senator in the 31-member Texas State Senate represents an average of 941,396 people. Both of those figures are larger than the average number of people represented by each member of the U.S. House of Representatives—761,169 people per district.
The largest ratio of population per member among state Representatives is also in California, where the Golden State’s 80 Assembly members represent an average of 494,709 people per district. Texas is again in second place as the 151 members of its state House represent an average of 194,555 people each.
On average, each of the country’s 1,973 state senators represent 167,820 people each after the 2020 census. The country’s 5,413 state representatives represent an average of 61,169 people each.
Among state Senates, North Dakota’s Senators represent the fewest people per district, an average of 16,589 per senator. Among state Representatives, New Hampshire’s represent the fewest at 3,448 people each.
Wyoming was the only state that changed its number of legislators after the 2020 census. The state added one Senate seat and two House of Representatives seats. All other states kept the number of legislators the same. Minnesota has the largest state Senate with 67 members, and New Hampshire has the largest state House with 400 members.
Forty-six of the 50 states had the average number of residents per legislator increase. In three states—Illinois, Mississippi, and West Virginia—this ratio decreased because they had lower populations after the 2020 census as compared with the 2010 census. In Wyoming, the ratio of population per legislator also decreased because that state increased its number of legislators.
Here are the states with the largest number of residents per state Senate district:
California – 989,419
Texas – 941,396
Florida – 539,263
Ohio – 357,844
New York – 320,885
Here are the states with the smallest number of residents per state Senate district:
North Dakota – 16,589
Wyoming – 18,636
Vermont – 21,450
Montana – 21,708
South Dakota – 25,365
Here are the states with the largest number of residents per state House district:
California – 494,709
Texas – 194,555
Florida – 179,754
New York – 134,772
Arizona – 119,315
Here are the states with the smallest number of residents per state House district:
Here’s what’s in store for you as you start your day:
Nearly 1 million residents per Senate district in California
Ballotpedia is covering elections today in 10 states
42 candidates filed for federal and statewide offices last week
Nearly 1 million residents per Senate district in California
After the 2020 census, California’s 40 state Senators represent more than 39.5 million people—an average of 989,419 people per district. Each member of the 31-member Texas State Senate represents an average of 941,396 people. Both of those figures are larger than the average number of people represented by members of the U.S. House of Representatives—761,169 people per district.
Now that redistricting is behind us in most states, let’s take a look at the various district sizes and population represented by state legislators.
The largest population per district ratio among state House districts is also in California, where the Golden State’s 80 Assembly members represent an average of 494,709 people per district. Texas is again in second place as the 151 members of its state House represent an average of 194,555 people.
There are 1,973 state senators nationwide after the 2020 census—which averages to 167,820 Americans per senator. The country’s 5,413 state representatives represent an average of 61,169 people each.
Among state Senates, North Dakota’s senators represent the fewest people per district, an average of 16,589 per senator. Among state Representatives, New Hampshire’s represent the fewest at 3,448 people each.
Here are the states with the largest average number of residents per state Senate district:
California – 989,419 people per district
Texas – 941,396
Florida – 539,263
Ohio – 357,844
New York – 320,885
Here are the states with the smallest average number of residents per state Senate district:
North Dakota – 16,589
Wyoming – 18,636
Vermont – 21,450
Montana – 21,708
South Dakota – 25,365
Here are the states with the largest average number of residents per state House district:
California – 494,709 people per district
Texas – 194,555
Florida – 179,754
New York – 134,772
Arizona – 119,315
Here are the states with the smallest average number of residents per state House district:
New Hampshire – 3,448
Vermont – 4,290
North Dakota – 8,295
Maine – 9,030
Wyoming – 9,318
Wyoming was the only state that changed its number of legislators during redistricting after the 2020 census. The state added one Senate district and two House of Representatives districts. All other states kept their number of legislators the same. Minnesota has the largest state Senate with 67 members, and New Hampshire has the largest state House with 400 members.
Forty-six of the 50 states saw the average number of residents per legislator increase after the 2020 census compared to the 2010 census. Thirteen states had the average number of residents per legislator increase by more than 10% as compared to after the 2010 census, with four—Utah, Idaho, Texas, and North Dakota—having increases of more than 15%. In three states—Illinois, Mississippi, and West Virginia—the ratio of residents per legislator decreased since their population was lower after the 2020 census compared to the 2010 census. Wyoming’s population per legislator decreased 1.6% because the state increased its number of legislators.
Ballotpedia is covering elections today in 10 states
Today is one of the busiest election days of 2023, with voters deciding statewide, legislative, or local races in at least 10 states. Headlining today’s contests are statewide primaries in Kentucky and Pennsylvania.
Over the past several weeks, we’ve covered many of these races here in the Brew, but here’s a quick summary of today’s top contests:
Voters in Kentucky will decide party primaries for six statewide offices, including governor, where 12 candidates are running in the Republican primary. Incumbent Gov. Andy Beshear (D) faces two challengers for the Democratic nomination.
Beshear was first elected in 2019, defeating incumbent Gov. Matt Bevin (R), 49.2% to 48.8%. Beshear previously served one term as attorney general from 2015 to 2019 and is the son of former Gov. Steve Beshear (D).
We profiled the Republican gubernatorial primary in yesterday’s Brew, but if you didn’t get a chance to read that edition, State Attorney General Daniel Cameron, former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Kelly Craft, and Agriculture Commissioner Ryan Quarles lead in polling and media attention.
Former President Donald Trump (R) endorsed Cameron last year, while U.S. Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.) and U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) endorsed Craft. Quarles has the endorsements of four state senators, 22 state representatives, and other local state officials.
Kentucky—alongside Kansas, Louisiana, and North Carolina—is one of four states with a Democratic governor that Trump (R) won in 2020. That year, Trump defeated Joe Biden (D) 62% to 36% in the state. The last Democratic presidential nominee to carry the state was former President Bill Clinton in 1996.
Nine candidates are running in the Democratic primary for mayor of Philadelphia on May 16. The winner will face David Oh—the only candidate seeking the Republican nomination—in the Nov. 7 general election. Incumbent Jim Kenney (D), first elected in 2015, is term-limited.
Jeff Brown, Allan Domb, Helen Gym, Cherelle Parker, and Rebecca Rhynhart lead in fundraising and media attention.
Domb, Gym, Parker, and Rhynhart all held elected positions in the city until beginning their mayoral campaigns last year. Philadelphia has a resign-to-run rule where candidates who are city employees or hold public office in the city must resign from those positions before seeking another office.
Unlike many other mayoral elections we’ve mentioned in the Brew, Philadelphia’s are partisan, meaning the winner of this primary will appear on the general election ballot with a party label. Philadelphia has not elected a Republican mayor since Bernard Samuel, whose term ended in 1952.
Of the country’s 100 most-populous cities, Philadelphia is one of 62 with a Democratic mayor. Twenty-six have Republican mayors, and 10 are independent or nonpartisan. Ballotpedia could not identify the partisan affiliation of two mayors.
Democratic and Republican voters in Pennsylvania will make their picks for the state’s upcoming supreme court election in November.
These upcoming primaries will determine the major party candidates running to fill a vacancy on the court created after Chief Justice Max Baer (D) died last year. The winner in November will be elected to a 10-year term on the court.
Democrats have controlled the Pennsylvania Supreme Court since 2015 when they established a 5-2 majority. The outcome of this election will not affect the court’s governing majority. But it will set the stage for the upcoming 2025 elections when three justice’s terms—all Democrats—are set to expire.
Both of this year’s primaries have two candidates. Deborah Kunselman and Daniel McCaffery, both judges on the Pennsylvania Superior Court, are running in the Democratic primary. Patricia McCullough and Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio are running in the Republican primary. McCullough is a judge on the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court. Carluccio is a judge on Montgomery County’s Court of Common Pleas.
Pennsylvania is one of eight states that use partisan elections for state supreme court justices. And it’s one of two states holding supreme court elections this year. Wisconsin voters elected a new justice on April 4.
Voters in Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, New Hampshire, New York, and Oregon also go to the polls today. Click here to read about all the key elections taking place on May 16. And for a full list of the races Ballotpedia will be tracking in the months ahead, bookmark our upcoming elections calendar at the link below.
42 candidates filed for federal and statewide offices last week
Last week, 42 candidates filed to run for congressional and state offices—including for elections in 2023, 2024, 2025, and 2026. Two weeks ago, we tracked 37 candidates who declared for congressional and state offices.
This year, we’ve tracked 654 declared candidates for federal and statewide offices.
Here’s a breakdown of the candidates who declared last week:
Of the partisan nature of the declared candidates:
24 are Democrats.
18 are Republicans.
Of the offices tracked:
30 candidates filed for Congress.
4 candidates filed for governorships.
8 filed for a lower state executive office.
Between March 6 and March 27, we tracked an average of 21 candidates who filed for federal or state elections. Between April 3 and April 24, that average increased to 33 candidates.
We cover elections for tens of thousands of offices across the country, and part of that work includes keeping tabs on the candidates who file to run for those offices. We’ll periodically update you on how many candidates are signing up to run for state and congressional offices. We process both official and declared candidates.
Click here to read more about our definition of candidacy. Click the link below to see a list of all declared candidates for federal elections in 2024.
The U.S. Supreme Court on May 4 directed the parties in Moore v. Harper to file supplemental letter briefs in the case by May 11. The court’s order asked the parties, “What is the effect on this Court’s jurisdiction of the April 28, 2023 order of the North Carolina Supreme Court?
On April 28, the North Carolina Supreme Court overturned its February 2022 decision that the state’s enacted congressional and legislative maps were unconstitutional due to partisan gerrymandering. It struck down the maps the legislature enacted in 2021 and the remedial maps used for the 2022 elections. The court’s order also said that the legislature’s original 2021 maps were developed based on incorrect criteria and ruled that the General Assembly should create new congressional and legislative boundaries for use starting with the 2024 elections.
In its ruling, the court said, “we hold that partisan gerrymandering claims present a political question that is nonjusticiable under the North Carolina Constitution. Accordingly, the decision of this Court in Harper I is overruled. We affirm the three judge panel’s 11 January 2022 Judgment concluding, inter alia, that partisan gerrymandering claims are nonjusticiable, political questions and dismissing all of plaintiffs’ claims with prejudice.”
Amy Howe wrote at SCOTUSBlog that the U.S. Supreme Court “asked lawyers…to weigh in on whether the court can still hear the case in the wake of a recent ruling by the North Carolina Supreme Court, which reversed its earlier decision in the underlying redistricting dispute that sparked the case…Once those briefs have been filed, the justices could dismiss the case (as one set of challengers has already suggested they should), or they could continue to decide the case on the merits.”
Howe also wrote, “The timing of the justices’ decision likely could depend on the result that it reaches. An order simply dismissing the case could come relatively quickly after the supplemental briefs are filed on May 11, although such an order could take longer if it is accompanied by separate dissents or statements from one or more justices. In any event, the justices are expected to act on the case by late June or early July, when they begin their summer recess.”
The parties in the case also filed supplemental briefs with the U.S. Supreme Court on March 20 at SCOTUS’ request after the North Carolina Supreme Court announced it would re-hear the case. The briefs outlined each party’s view on whether SCOTUS still had jurisdiction in light of the state court’s decision. The legislators that brought the case and one of the respondents—Common Cause—told the justices that the court should still decide the case. The other respondents wrote that the U.S. Supreme Court should dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction because the original case was still under appeal.
As a result of state supreme court elections in 2022, the North Carolina Supreme Court flipped from a 4-3 Democratic majority to a 5-2 Republican majority. In the 2022 legislative elections, the state elected 7 Democratic U.S. House members and 7 Republican ones. Republicans won partisan control of the state Senate, 30-20, and the state House of Representatives, 71-49.
Here’s what’s in store for you as you start your day:
Virginia’s legislative elections have most open-seat races since at least 2011
Previewing Pennsylvania’s May 16 statewide primaries
Twenty-four upcoming vacancies among Article III judges
Virginia’s legislative elections have most open-seat races since at least 2011
Virginia is one of four states, along with Louisiana, Mississippi, and New Jersey, that are holding regular state legislative elections this year. Now that the candidate filing period has closed, let’s see what we can learn from the candidate lists.
43 districts—or 31% of the state’s 140-member General Assembly—are open-seat races as the incumbent is not running for election.
This is the most open state legislative seats in Virginia – which does not have term limits – since at least 2011, when 20 districts, or 14.3%, were open.
Of the retiring incumbents, 22 are Democrats, and 21 are Republicans. Two districts have incumbent versus incumbent primaries this year:
House District 47, with a Republican primary between Reps. Marie March (R) and Wren Williams (R); and,
Senate District 18, with a Democratic primary between Sens. Louise Lucas (D) and Lionell Spruill (D).
This is Virginia’s first state legislative elections using district boundaries adopted after the 2020 census. The Virginia Supreme Court unanimously approved legislative district maps for both chambers after the Virginia Redistricting Commission missed its deadline for approving map proposals. The number of open districts tends to increase after redistricting.
In addition to the increase in open districts, other competitiveness metrics—like the number of contested primaries—increased compared to previous election cycles. This year, there are 47 contested primaries, representing 20.9% of all possible primaries, up from 14.5% in 2021. These figures do not include the 55 districts that Ballotpedia has identified that are holding non-primary nominating contests, like conventions, all for Republicans. In Virginia, local party committees can choose to hold conventions instead of primaries to select nominees for office.
Overall, 279 major party candidates are running for state legislative offices in Virginia—154 Democrats and 125 Republicans.
Virginia has had divided government since Republicans won the governorship and the House of Delegates in 2021. Republicans currently have a 50-46 majority in the House with four vacancies. Democrats hold a 22-18 majority in the Senate.
Virginia’s state legislative primaries are on June 20.
Previewing Pennsylvania’s May 16 statewide primaries
Pennsylvania is one of eight states electing statewide offices in 2023 and one of three—along with Washington and Wisconsin—where judicial races are at the top of the ballot. The state is holding party primaries on May 16 for one seat on the state supreme court, two judgeships on the Pennsylvania Superior Court, and one seat on the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court.
Voters will also decide special elections in two state House districts that could determine partisan control of the chamber, as well as local primaries.
Pennsylvania’s primaries for judicial and municipal offices are closed, meaning only voters registered with a particular party may vote in them. Independent and unaffiliated voters can vote on ballot measures and in special elections.
Here’s all of what’s on Pennsylvania’s ballot on May 16.
State Supreme Court
We previewed the Democratic and Republican primaries for one seat on the state supreme court on Monday. The outcome of this election will not affect the court’s governing majority. But it will set the stage for the upcoming 2025 elections when three judges’ terms—all Democrats—are set to expire. If Democrats retain the vacant seat this year, Republicans would need to win at least two of the three seats in 2025 to gain a majority. If Republicans win this year, they would only need to win one seat in 2025.
Democrats have controlled the Pennsylvania Supreme Court since 2015, when they established a 5-2 majority. Both of this year’s primaries have two candidates.
Other statewide courts
The Pennsylvania Superior Court and Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court are the state’s two intermediate appellate courts.
Two Pennsylvania Superior Court judges face retention elections, and another two seats on that court are up for partisan election this year. The Democratic primary for the two seats up for partisan election has three candidates, and the Republican primary has two candidates. The Pennsylvania Superior Court reviews most of the civil and criminal cases that are appealed from the courts of common pleas in the state’s 67 counties.
One judgeship on the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court is also up for partisan election. Both of this year’s primaries have two candidates. Cases heard by the Commonwealth Court are generally determined by what the case is about and the identity of the parties to the lawsuit. The Commonwealth Court usually takes cases involving state and local government and regulatory agencies and cases involving certain specific topics, such as banking, taxation, and elections.
Judges on all of Pennsylvania’s appellate courts, including the state supreme court, run initially in partisan elections for 10-year terms. After a judge’s first term, he or she must run in a retention election to serve subsequent terms. Pennsylvania is one of eight states that uses partisan elections for both its supreme court and intermediate appellate courts.
Mayor of Philadelphia
As we previewed on April 17, nine candidates are running in the Democratic primary for mayor of Philadelphia. The winner will face David Oh—the only candidate seeking the Republican nomination—in the Nov. 7 general election. Philadelphia has not elected a Republican mayor since Bernard Samuel, whose term ended in 1952. Incumbent Jim Kenney (D), first elected in 2015, is term-limited.
Jeff Brown, Allan Domb, Helen Gym, Cherelle Parker, and Rebecca Rhynhart lead in fundraising and media attention.
Philadelphia voters will also decide partisan primaries for the register of wills, sheriff, city council, city commissioners, court of common pleas judges, and municipal court judges. In addition, there are also four local ballot measures. More information about the elections for the municipal offices can be found here, and information on the local ballot questions is here.
State legislative special elections
Voters in two Pennsylvania House of Representatives districts will decide special elections that will determine partisan control of that legislative chamber. These elections will fill vacancies after the resignations of Lynda Schlegel Culver (R) and Michael Zabel (D). Culver ran unopposed in every election since 2018, including most recently in her 2022 re-election bid, while Zabel won re-election in 2022 with 64.3% of votes. We previewed these races in the Brew on April 25.
Other municipal elections
Ballotpedia is also covering primaries for controller and city council in Pittsburgh, city council primaries in the state’s capital of Harrisburg, and primaries for the following offices in Allegheny County—where Pittsburgh is located: County chief executive, controller, district attorney, treasurer, county council, court of common pleas judges, and magisterial district judges.
As part of our expanded coverage in 10 states, we’re covering all school board primary races in Pennsylvania on May 16. All districts in Pennsylvania are holding elections this year, with approximately half of the state’s 4,491 seats on the ballot. Pennsylvania holds school board elections every two years in odd-numbered years.
Twenty-four upcoming vacancies among Article III judges
There are 24 total announced upcoming vacancies for Article III judgeships, according to the latest data from U.S. Courts. This is in addition to the 76 current federal judiciary vacancies out of the 870 such judgeships.
These positions are not yet vacant but will be at some point in the future, with every judge having announced his or her intent to either leave the bench or assume senior status. In the meantime, these judges will continue to serve in their current positions. The president does not need to wait for a seat to become vacant before starting the confirmation process for a successor.
The next upcoming scheduled vacancy will take place on May 15, 2023, when U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas Judge Barbara Lynn assumes senior status.
Article III judgeships refer to federal judges who serve on the U.S. Supreme Court, the U.S. Court of International Trade, or one of the 13 U.S. courts of appeal or 94 U.S. district courts. These are lifetime appointments made by the president and confirmed by the U.S. Senate.
President Biden has nominated 160 individuals to federal judgeships on Article III courts. As of May 3, 121 have been confirmed, and 34 are going through the confirmation process. Of those going through the confirmation process, 22 are awaiting a vote in the U.S. Senate, seven are awaiting a committee vote, and five are awaiting a committee hearing. Since Reagan, presidents have made an average of 103 judicial appointments through May 1 of their third year in office. President Bill Clinton (D) made the most appointments through May 1 of his third year with 137. President George H.W. Bush (R) made the fewest with 74.
Deborah Kunselman and Daniel McCaffery are running in the Democratic primary for one judgeship on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court on May 16. The winner will face the Republican nominee—either Patricia McCullough or Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio—in the general election on Nov. 7. The filing deadline for the primary was March 7.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court is the state’s court of last resort, and justices run in partisan elections for 10-year terms. After a judge’s first term, he or she must run in a retention election to serve subsequent terms. The winner of this election will succeed Justice Max Baer (D), who passed away on Sept. 30, 2022. Baer’s term expired in 2023, and he could not run for re-election since Pennsylvania judges must retire at the end of the calendar year in which they reach 75 years of age.
The state supreme court can hear appeals from both statewide and local courts and assume jurisdiction over any case in the Pennsylvania court system. Peter Hall of the Pittsburgh City Paper wrote, “The Supreme Court hears appeals in cases involving unsettled areas of the law, reviews all death penalty convictions, and has played the decisive role in redrawing Pennsylvania’s congressional districts in recent years.”
As Kate Huangpu wrote for Spotlight PA, “The state’s primaries are closed, meaning only registered Democrats and Republicans can vote for candidates during these spring contests. (Unaffiliated and third-party voters can, however, vote on ballot questions, other referendums, and special elections during a primary.)”
Kunselman is a judge on the Pennsylvania Superior Court, a position to which she was elected in 2017. She also worked as an attorney, a solicitor with Beaver County, and was first elected as a judge in Beaver County in 2006. Kunselman emphasizes her judicial experience in her campaign, saying on her website that she had “the most experience of any candidate for the Supreme Court with 17 years as a judge” and had “developed expertise in Civil, Family, Juvenile, and Criminal court.”
McCaffery is also a judge on the Pennsylvania Superior Court, a position to which he was elected in 2019. He is an Army veteran and worked as an attorney, an assistant district attorney in Philadelphia, and was first elected as a judge in Philadelphia in 2013. McCaffery also emphasizes his judicial experience, saying on his website, “Assigned to one of the busiest trial divisions in Pennsylvania, Judge McCaffery presided over one hundred jury trials and thousands of bench trials…McCaffery is currently the supervising judge for wiretaps and was selected by the Supreme Court to serve on the Court of Judicial Discipline.”
Pennsylvania’s Democratic Party endorsed McCaffery at a meeting of state party committee members on Jan. 29.
The partisan balance of the court changed as a result of the 2015 elections from a 4-3 Republican majority to a 5-2 Democratic majority when Justices Kevin M. Dougherty (D), David Wecht (D) and Christine Donohue (D) were elected to three open seats. The partisan composition of the court cannot change as a result of the 2023 election.
Kate Huangpu and Stephen Caruso wrote for Spotlight PA that “Justices elected as Democrats have been in the majority since 2015, and flipping the court back has been a top Republican priority since then. The seven-member court is currently composed of four Democrats and two Republicans.”
The most recent state supreme court election in Pennsylvania was in 2021, when Kevin Brobson (R) defeated Maria McLaughlin (D), 52% to 48%. Brobson’s election did not change the partisan composition of the court since he succeeded Justice Thomas Saylor (R), who did not run for another term because he turned 75 in 2021.
The next scheduled state supreme court elections in Pennsylvania will take place in 2025 when the three Democratic justices first elected in 2015 will be up for re-election. Unless there are unexpected vacancies, 2025 is the first year that the partisan balance of the court can change from a Democratic to a Republican majority.
In a 5-2 decision on April 28, 2023, the North Carolina Supreme Court overturned a 2022 decision that the state’s enacted congressional and legislative maps were unconstitutional due to partisan gerrymandering. The court vacated the maps the legislature enacted in 2021 and the remedial maps used for the 2022 elections. In its ruling, the court said, “we hold that partisan gerrymandering claims present a political question that is nonjusticiable under the North Carolina Constitution. Accordingly, the decision of this Court in Harper I is overruled. We affirm the three judge panel’s 11 January 2022 Judgment concluding, inter alia, that partisan gerrymandering claims are nonjusticiable, political questions and dismissing all of plaintiffs’ claims with prejudice.”
The court’s order also said that the legislature’s original 2021 maps were developed based on incorrect criteria and ruled that the General Assembly should develop new congressional and legislative boundaries to be used starting with the 2024 elections: “Just as this Court’s Harper I decision forced the General Assembly to draw the 2022 Plans under a mistaken interpretation of our constitution, the Lewis order forced the General Assembly to draw the 2021 Plans under the same mistaken interpretation of our constitution…The General Assembly shall have the opportunity to enact a new set of legislative and congressional redistricting plans, guided by federal law, the objective constraints in Article II, Sections 3 and 5, and this opinion. ‘When established’ in accordance with a proper understanding of the North Carolina Constitution, the new legislative plans “shall remain unaltered until the return of” the next decennial census.”
In a dissenting opinion, Justice Anita Earls wrote, “To be clear, this is not a situation in which a Democrat-controlled Court preferred Democrat-leaning districts and a Republican-controlled Court now prefers Republican-leaning districts. Here, a Democratic-controlled Court carried out its sworn duty to uphold the state constitution’s guarantee of free elections, fair to all voters of both parties. This decision is now vacated by a Republican-controlled Court seeking to ensure that extreme partisan gerrymanders favoring Republicans are established.”
In February 2022, the Wake County Superior Court enacted congressional district boundaries drawn by three court-appointed redistricting special masters and approved legislative maps that the General Assembly redrew earlier that month. Both actions were in response to the North Carolina Supreme Court’s 4-3 ruling on Feb. 4, 2022, that the state’s enacted congressional and legislative maps violated the state constitution. These district boundaries were used for the 2022 elections.
