Believe jurists were swayed by these donations

It’s absurd to

Regarding “State High Court Justices Took Nearly $180K From Law Firms in Catholic Sexual Abuse Case” (July 12) and the July 13 editorial “Disgraceful Conflict”:

The Post-Gazette has made it abundantly clear that it is quite displeased with the state Supreme Court for not releasing the grand jury report regarding alleged sexual abuse by Catholic clergy. Such an editorial position is understandableand quite predictable.

However, it is incredibly vindictive and journalistically reprehensible for a major newspaper to seek vengeance by publishing a Page 1 story and an editorial that are clearly designed to cast doubt on the personal honesty and judicial integrity of the SupremeCourt justices by implying that this decision has been influenced by campaign contributions that each of them has received from some of the attorneys involved in this legal matter.

The Philadelphia newspapers that published this same story included a box that listed such contributions as well as the total donations received by each justice in their respective campaigns. Simple math shows that the percentages of those specific contributions were Debra Todd, 3.6 percent; David Wecht, 1.2 percent; Christine Donohue, 2.8 percent; Kevin Dougherty, 0.4 percent; Max Baer, 2.8 percent; Thomas Saylor, 3.8 percent; and Sally Updyke Mundy, 0.6 percent.

For anyone to believe for one moment that any of these high-level jurists would be influenced in a judicial decision by such contributions is patently absurd.

With regard to the issue of whetherappellate court judges should be appointed rather than elected in order to depoliticize them, I would like to offer the following scenario for your readers’consideration.

Seven state Supreme Court justices like Roberts, Alito, Gorsuch, Thomas and, probably soon, Kavanaugh are appointed. How would Democrats and liberals feel about that? How about seven justices in Pennsylvania like Breyer, Ginsburg, Kagan, and Sotomayor? How would Republicans and conservatives feelabout that lineup?

Who would be appointing appellate court judges in Pennsylvania — some completely impartial,unbiased, politically and philosophically disinterested group? Or would not the political party in power, i.e., the governor and state Senate, appoint people to the judicial selection committee who are their political and legal philosophicalallies?

In contrast, when there are statewide elections, our Supreme Court justices are beholden to no single group. They are answerable only to all the voters.

Full disclosure: I am the proud father of Supreme CourtJustice David N. Wecht. CYRIL H. WECHT

Squirrel Hill