Two months ago, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court shot down one of the most brutal gerrymanders in the nation. The court found that when the state legislature drew a congressional map intended to elect 13 Republicans from a state that is, at best, a bluish-purple swing state, it violated the state constitution.
Earlier this week, Republicans in the state legislature shot their last bolt when they asked the federal Supreme Court to intervene. However, the Supremes refused to even hear the case, thus giving this gerrymander a proper burial. In the process, the Supremes let stand a map drawn by the state supreme court that gives Democrats a fighting chance at taking as many as three seats from the GOP and putting a fourth Republican incumbent in a tooth-and-nail battle with a Democratic incumbent who was drawn into his district.
The new map likely ends the career of Ryan Costello, whose district south of Philadelphia became eight points more Democratic in one stroke. A district south of Philadelphia and a district in the Lehigh Valley lost their tails into deep-red central Pennsylvania, making it very likely that both will flip. Additionally, Conor Lamb, who won a dramatic special election in a crimson-red district near Pittsburgh, had his home drawn out of that district and into a very swingy district west of Pittsburgh, giving him no worse than a 50-50 chance of dumping Republican incumbent Keith Rothfus.
In response, several Republican state representatives have launched an effort to impeach the five state supreme court justices who had the insolence to undo their work.
The tantrum actually began a month ago. Specifically, on February 5, just two weeks after the initial decision. That afternoon state representative Cris Dush–whose district is home to the world’s most famous groundhog, Punxsutawney Phil–asked his colleagues to sponsor articles of impeachment against the four state justices–all Democrats–who voted to strike down the map. One justice, Max Baer, believed the map was unconstitutional, but believed that a new map could wait until the 2020 cycle.
Dush’s memo makes for breathtaking reading. He argues that the court’s decision amounted to an unconstitutional judicial veto.
“This Order overrides the express legislative and executive authority, found in Article IV, Section 15 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, concerning the Governor’s veto authority and the General Assembly’s subsequent authority to override such veto. Article IV, Section 15 clearly lays out the path a bill must take to become law.”
To hear Dush talk, when the court struck down this gerrymander, the justices who signed that order “engaged in misbehavior in office,” and thus committed an impeachable offense.
Roland Martin spoke for just about every right-thinking person inside and outside Pennsylvania when he condemned this gambit. Listen here.
Martin spoke with state senator Vincent Hughes, a Democrat from Philadelphia, who slammed Dush’s proposal as “gangster politics of the highest order.” He reminded the audience that even though there are a million more registered Democrats in Pennsylvania than Republicans, there are only five Democrats representing the state in Congress. Martin agreed, saying that this was yet another case of Republicans not “playing fair” and “doing things that Democrats are scared to do.”
Lest you think calling this “gangster politics” is hyperbole, this move runs counter to one of the strongest precedents in our democracy. No matter how much the legislature may disagree with a ruling, and no matter how bad it may be, it is not grounds for impeachment.
That was firmly established in 1805, when the House impeached Supreme Court Justice Samuel Chase at Thomas Jefferson’s behest for some highly questionable rulings while serving as a trial judge. Even though Jefferson’s Democratic-Republicans controlled the Senate, Chase was acquitted on all eight articles. A number of Democratic-Republicans swallowed their personal distaste for Chase and voted to acquit, warning that impeaching a judge for bad rulings could set a dangerous precedent.
Can you imagine congressional Democrats starting impeachment proceedings against the five Supremes who voted for Citizens United? As damaging as that ruling was, impeaching justices over it would have been infantile, undemocratic, and flat-out wrong. What Dush was proposing was no different.
Dush was undaunted. Just hours after the federal Supreme Court spelled finus to the congressional gerrymander, he introduced four impeachment resolutions, one for each of the four justices who voted to overturn the map–David Wecht, Debra Todd, Christine Donohue, and Kevin Dougherty. Incredibly, Dush spun this as an effort to “protect the rule of law.” If he’d read his history books, he’d think otherwise.
Dush apparently has time to pull such a stunt, given that his district is located in one of the reddest areas of the infamous “Republican T”–the deep-red portion of Pennsylvania outside Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and Scranton/Wilkes-Barre. According to Daily Kos’ database of presidential results by state legislative district, Donald Trump carried Dush’s 66th District by a punishing 78-22 margin over Hillary Clinton–Trump’s second-best margin in the entire state.
He managed to round up support from 11 of his Republican colleagues. Roll credits, with Trump’s margins provided for easy reference courtesy Daily Kos’ database of presidential results by legislative district.
- Frank Ryan (101st District, Trump 58-37)
- Martin Causer (67th District, Trump 74-22)
- Jim Cox (129th District, Trump 58-37)
- Seth Grove (196th District, Trump 67-28)
- Kristin Phillips-Hill (93rd District, Trump 64-31)
- Dawn Keefer (92nd District, Trump 64-31)
- John McGinnis (79th District, Trump 65-30)
- Daryl Metcalfe (12th District, Trump 64-32)
- Dan Moul (91st District, Trump 64-32)
- Will Tallman (193rd District, Trump 68-27)
- Judy Ward (80th District, Trump 76-21)
Notice a pattern? All of them represent districts that would vote for a comatose Republican.
Sadly, it’s not all that surprising. When your district that is so heavily tilted toward your own party that you never have to fear being held to account, you can go one of two ways. You can either use your seniority to do some good for your district and your state or country, or you can take it as a license to act like an unhinged idiot.
It looks like the 12 lawmakers who have thrown their weight behind this misbegotten bill have gone the latter route, as has happened with far too many lawmakers from both sides of the aisle. In the process, they have brought shame and disgrace upon themselves and the people of Pennsylvania.
For now, the Republican leadership in the legislature is cool to this gambit. State house speaker Mike Turzai condemned the state supreme court ruling, but nonetheless says that he will “respect the decision of the U. S. Supreme Court.”
Nonetheless, this should be a wake-up call to saner people in Pennsylvania. Even if Turzai says he will respect the ruling, the mere fact so many members of his caucus even think this is a good idea proves that it’s time to take his gavel away from him. When Pennsylvanians go to the polls to elect a more representative delegation to Congress, they should take the time to toss out the Republicans in the state legislature. The signal must go out–voters are the ones who choose their representatives, not the other way around.
(featured image courtesy Dush’s Facebook)
