Holding Justice David Wecht Accountable
State Supreme Court Justice David Wecht stunned Pennsylvania’s political world with the announcement that he has left the Democrat Party and re-registered as “unaffiliated.” It is the first time since 2009, when then U.S. Senator Arlen Specter switched from Republican to Democrat, that a statewide elected official has departed the political party that put him into office.
Specter’s party switch was one of (failed) political expediency. Wecht had a more noble reason: his inability to continue belonging to a political party that countenances – even encourages – rampant antisemitism. The justice issued a statement explaining his decision:
“From 1998 to 2001 … I served as Vice-Chair of the Pennsylvania Democratic Party. In the quarter century that has passed since then, the Democratic Party has changed. Nazi tattoos, jihadist chants, intimidation and attacks at synagogues, and other hateful anti-Jewish invective and actions are minimized, ignored, and even coddled. Acquiescence to Jew-hatred is now disturbingly common among activists, leaders, and even many elected officials in the Democratic Party. I can no longer abide this. So, I won’t. I am no longer registered with any political party.”
Justice Wecht deserves credit and praise for recognizing the disturbing trend in his former party. However, as legendary broadcaster Paul Harvey would say, there is the “rest of the story.”
Unlike Arlen Specter, Justice Wecht faces no threat of political retribution. Specter’s party switch was prompted by the (pun intended) specter of defeat at the hands of future U.S. Senator Pat Toomey in the upcoming Republican primary. Although Specter was embraced and endorsed by the state’s Democrat Party hierarchy, the grassroots rebelled and nominated Congressman Joe Sestak who went on to lose to Toomey in the General Election.
Pennsylvania Supreme Court Justices serve ridiculously long ten-year terms and then, rather than face voters in a competitive election, stand for retention for an additional ten-year term. Wecht, along with two of his colleagues were retained just last year. Thus, he will not have to face voters until 2035, assuming he does not retire at the end of his current term.
Justice Wecht must be held accountable for his role in creating the antisemitic cesspool that is today’s Democrat Party. It is important here to understand I am talking about the consequences of his judicial rulings, not his personal conduct.
In 2015 as a candidate for the high court Wecht, as noted a former state Democrat Party official, campaigned on redrawing Pennsylvania’s congressional district lines to benefit future Democrat congressional candidates. This was a clear violation of the judicial ethics which hold candidates cannot speak on the campaign trail about how they will rule on cases that might end up before their bench. The impotent Pennsylvania Bar Association turned a blind eye to Wecht’s transgression.
Once on the bench Justice Wecht made good on his promise. In an unprecedented move the state Supreme Court in 2018 ordered a redrawing of Pennsylvania’s congressional district lines. A Left-wing college professor from California was called upon to draw a new map which Wecht and his colleagues imposed by judicial fiat.
Again, following the 2020 census – in clear violation of the state constitution which grants redistricting power to the legislature – Wecht and his court allies brought the California college professor back for a repeat performance and then again imposed the current highly gerrymandered congressional district map by court order.
The result has been to not only tilt the electoral playing field to the benefit of Democrats, but it has enabled the rise of candidates from the party’s extreme Left wing. That is especially true in southwestern Pennsylvania where U.S. Representative Summer Lee has joined with the extremist “squad” to push a far-Left agenda. It should be noted that Lee has frequently made remarks offensive to the large and vibrant Jewish community in her district – espousing the rhetoric that has driven Wech from the Democrat Party.
In those districts represented by (very) slightly more moderate Democrats the “acquiescence” cited by Wecht prevails. Unlike U.S. Senator John Fetterman Pennsylvania’s congressional Democrats seem not to have been blessed with the ability for independent thought – or at least the willingness to express it. Thus, the congressional district map imposed on Penn’s woods by Justice Wecht and his colleagues has resulted in the type of extremism he is now denouncing.
That being said, let us now give credit to Justice Wecht for his principled stand against antisemitism. Let us hope that his new status as “unaffiliated” will manifest itself by his leaving legislating to lawmakers and basing future rulings not on political considerations, but on the state’s constitution.
(Lowman S. Henry is Chairman & CEO of the Lincoln Institute and host of the weekly Lincoln Radio Journal and American Radio Journal. His e-mail address is lhenry@lincolninstitute.org.)
Permission to reprint is granted provided author and affiliation are cited.
