Don’t Let the Shock and Awe Distract You From the Importance of State Courts
The second Trump administration wasted no time in deploying a “shock and awe” strategy, bombarding us with lawless extremism through countless executive orders. As we navigate the sheer quantity of hate and unconstitutional extremism found within these orders, it’s essential we not let this blitzkrieg distract or deter us.
As Trump attempts to remake the federal government into an instrument of destruction, we must both hold the line on our federal courts and also turn to state courts as a critical defense for our civil rights, health and safety.
State courts might sound off the beaten path right now as all eyes are on the chaos of federal actions, but we ignore them at our own peril. Our federal courts are going to be tied up with challenges to Trump’s policies, and we’re going to spend the next four years opposing Trump’s judicial nominees at every turn. Our state Supreme Courts, however, are going to be facing challenges to the many state level policies that protect us when the federal government can’t or won’t.
In fact, state constitutions and the Supreme Courts that interpret them have long defended, and even expanded, our rights and protections. State courts in Vermont and Massachusetts recognized the dignity of LGBTQ+ relationships long before Obergefell granted marriage equality across the country. Just last year, the Montana Supreme Court recognized the right to a clean and healthful environment, which could protect the land and communities at risk as Trump rolls back clean air, water and climate protections. And numerous state courts have blunted the effects of the Dobbs decision by enshrining or recognizing the right to an abortion in state law.
While the process for determining who sits on these critical courts varies from state to state, we the people have a say, sometimes in the direct election of justice and elsewhere of the governors and state legislators who appoint and confirm them.
Twenty-two states directly elect their Supreme Court justices. Sometimes these elections are explicitly partisan with candidates aligning with political parties, while other times the elections are nonpartisan and it’s not immediately evident on the ballot how the candidates are aligned. Some states also hold retention elections to extend the terms of judges and justices previously appointed to their positions. Voters play a determinative role in who controls these courts.
In 2024, 32 state Supreme Courts held elections for a total of 81 seats, the outcomes of which will be felt for years to come. For example, the Michigan Supreme Court’s Democratic majority grew, while a Republican sweep in Ohio strengthened conservative control of that state’s court.
North Carolina’s tight Supreme Court race is still not finalized, with Republican candidate Jefferson Griffin, a state appeals judge, trying to convince the Republican-controlled court to throw out 66,000 votes and flip the win to him from Democratic incumbent Justice Allison Riggs. As it stands, the vote margin is just 734 votes; every vote cast in these elections truly does matter.
State courts handle so many of the cases and issues that end up impacting our daily lives, and we must in turn carefully consider who sits on them.
Last November’s 2024 elections also resulted in some historic firsts. The Kentucky Supreme Court now has its first Black woman (and second Black justice ever) thanks to the election of Pamela Goodwine, who brings experience as a judge and chair of the Kentucky Commission on Human Rights. Louisiana’s redistricting led to the creation of a new majority-Black Supreme Court district, and its residents elected John Michael Guidry to become the state’s fourth-ever Black justice.
This year, two states that have been hotbeds for contentious voting rights litigation will hold state court elections. Those states, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, made history in 2023 with the two most expensive state court elections ever — demonstrating how important these races are becoming.
Wisconsin may rise to the same occasion again. Elon Musk, who is currently wreaking havoc dismantling the federal government after playing an outsized role propping up Trump’s campaign field efforts, has called on the people of Wisconsin to vote for the Republican-supported candidate in this April’s technically nonpartisan election.
Motivated by his dislike for the court’s ruling last summer to reinstate absentee ballot drop boxes, Musk is hoping that a victory by the more conservative candidate, former attorney general and Republican Brad Schimel, will lead to more rulings against voting rights — and more Republican victories at the ballot box. Schimel and his opponent Susan Crawford are both judges on county circuit courts; Crawford is a former assistant attorney general and counsel to former Gov. James Doyle (D) with proven experience serving the people of Wisconsin. That election is coming up soon on April 1.
Pennsylvania’s race will be held in November, as three Democratic justices face retention elections. Christine Donohue, David Wecht and Kevin Dougherty have served on the state Supreme Court since 2015. As it stands, the court currently has five Democrats and two Republicans. Should all three candidates lose their retention elections, it could create an opportunity to shift the balance of that court.
Pennsylvania has its own billionaire, Jeffrey Yass, who has poured tons of money into past races to try to earn wins for Republican candidates, and with the court reconsidering its past ruling against the counting of some mail-in ballots, voting rights might become a motivating force in that race as well.
These are just a warm-up for 2026, when 31 states will hold elections for 55 state court seats by current counts.
In a frightening time with incredible extremism coming out of the White House, it’s important to focus on what we can control and change. Our state courts handle so many of the cases and issues that end up impacting our daily lives, and we must in turn carefully consider who sits on them. Don’t let the shock and awe distract you from the real impacts you can still make.
To make sure you’re keeping up with how to play your part in ensuring progressive victories in these state court races, take the Alliance for Justice Action Campaign’s State Courts Voter Pledge. To learn more about our state courts, including how your state selects its justices, check out this State Courts Hub.
Keith Thirion is the interim co-president and vice president of strategy at Alliance for Justice and co-president at AFJ Action. As a contributor to Democracy Docket, Thirion writes about the U.S. Supreme Court, judicial reform and the importance of state courts.