Oct 21, 2023 By Gary Stout 4 min read

The Nov. 7 ballot in Washington County asks voters to consider the retention of Judges Valarie Costanzo and Michael Lucas for a second, 10-year term on the Washington County Court of Common Pleas. This pair of jurists were initially elected to the bench in 2013 on both the Republican and Democratic ballots. In the upcoming election, if these judges receive more “yes” votes than “no” votes, each will serve another term.

There are two questions facing non-lawyers who are being asked to make this important decision. First, what is the purpose of a judicial retention election? Second, how is a voter unfamiliar with the day-to-day work of a local judge expected to make an educated decision? Fortunately, the Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts (AOPC) and the local Washington County Bar Association (WCBA) provide some answers to help inform voters not familiar with the legal system.

When candidates for the Court of Common Pleas initially run for election, they are affiliated with a political party. They campaign against other candidates and are permitted to run on both Democrat and Republican ballots in the primary. The fact that 10 years ago both Costanzo and Lucas won on both ballots is a strong reminder of their qualifications to serve as judges. A majority of voters from both political parties elected them to serve on our local Court of Common Pleas.

This November, when running for retention, Costanzo and Lucas are not labeled as members of either political party. According to the AOPC, “Retention is a nonpolitical method of reelecting Pennsylvania judges and is intended to be politically neutral as they do not require judges to engage in campaigning against other candidates.”

In the federal courts, the judges at all levels, including the Supreme Court, are appointed and often serve for life. In Pennsylvania, because judges are initially elected, there must be a method to permit the public to “judge the judges” on a recurring basis. Retention votes are designed to be a nonpolitical means for voters to weigh in on the overall performance of members on the bench.

In order to make the process as nonpolitical as possible, the names of retention candidates appear on a separate area at the end of the November ballot, apart from individuals running for other offices. Political considerations are not part of the retention election equation. The only factors for voters to consider in retaining Costanzo and Lucas are performance and integrity.

Retention elections were adopted by Pennsylvania with the view that most sitting judges would be retained in subsequent elections. After all, 10 years of judicial experience is a valuable commodity, particularly in a smaller county like Washington County, where each judge has been asked to work in the diverse areas of civil, criminal, and family court. Moreover, once a judge’s courtroom demeanor and legal opinions are known, attorneys who practice before them are familiar with what to expect, and the wheels of justice turn smoothly.

How is the voter who is not a lawyer expected to gauge the achievements and judicial conduct of this year’s judicial retention candidates? On this question, the WCBA provides critical information for voters. A poll was conducted among all members of the local bar association, and they voted overwhelmingly to retain them. The lawyers were asked to consider in their decision each judge’s integrity, legal ability, diligence, and judicial temperament. The members of the Bar returned a 95% retention vote for Lucas and 86% vote for Costanzo.

As related by the WCBA, “Our members have practiced before these judges, and their perspective should be valuable to the public.” Based on this poll, all voters can confidently retain both hard-working and valuable judges, Costanzo and Lucas, for another term.

Gary Stout is a Washington attorney.