

Michael H Wojcik
Democrat | Pennsylvania
Candidate Profile
Activist
BIOGRAPHY
Name
Michael H Wojcik
Party
Democrat
Election Year
2025
Election
PA General School Boards, Judicial & Municipal Races
Race
Commonwealth Court (retention of Wojcik)
Incumbent
Yes
EDUCATION
Candidate did not provide
WORK & MILITARY
Candidate did not provide
AFFILIATIONS
Candidate did not provide
POLITICAL OFFICES HELD
Candidate did not provide
POLITICAL OFFICES SOUGHT
Candidate did not provide
ENDORSEMENTS
LIBERAL (2)
Conservation Voters of Pennsylvania; Action Together NEPA
SELECTED CONTRIBUTIONS
CONSERVATIVE
GIVEN BY CANDIDATE (0)
RECEIVED BY CANDIDATE (5)
Jeff Gorell (2025); John Campbell (2025); Kevin McCarthy (2025); Shannon Grove (2025); Save Proposition 13 (2020)
LIBERAL
GIVEN BY CANDIDATE (7)
Local, County, and District Democratic Organizations (2025); NGP Van (2015); PAC 1742 (2015); Erin McClelland (2014); Josh Shapiro (2014)
RECEIVED BY CANDIDATE (43)
Allyson Damikolas (2025); Anthony Rendon (2025); Fiona Ma (2025); Jan Perry (2025); Jimmy Gomez (2025)
OTHER INFORMATION
Elected to the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 2015. (pacourts.us)
"Judge Wojcik’s legal career reflects his commitment to fairness, integrity, and the rule of law—values that are especially important as we work to restore balance to the Commonwealth Court. Retaining Judge Wojcik is crucial to ensuring continued progress toward a fair and impartial judiciary for all Pennsylvanians." (ttdems.com)
On The Zekely Podcast, Judge Wojcik described himself as a "Roosevelt Democrat" and discussed the importance political positions not influencing with judicial opinions.
Wojcik explained, The Pennsylvania Constitution "... is a constitution of expansive rights, and our Supreme Court since 2015 has been cognizant of these rights that have been dormant for so many years—environmental rights, reproductive rights, which are close to my heart, having married an obstetrician. It's not just about abortion. We are the last line of defense, and we're fiercely independent. Once you lose judicial independence, then people become above the law." (The Zekely Podcast)
Dept. of Ag., et al. v. A. Miller, et al. (2025). Judge Wojcik joined the Court's opinion. The Court found that the trial court had right to stop the Miller's from selling raw milk only inside Pennsylvania, because the law wasn't clear about out-of-state sales and stopping all sales would have seriously hurt their farm, leaving claims regarding out-of-state sales and constitutional challengs for trial.
For a more detailed summary, see case summary.
Center for Coalfield Justice v. Washington Cnty. Bd. of Elections (2024). Judge Wojcik authored opinion. The Court found that the Board's policy of not telling voters when their mail-in ballot were rejected, due voter error, was wrong because it kept them from casting provisional ballots,so the Court required the Board to notify voters and make sure they could still vote.
For a more detailed summary, see case summary.
D.M. v. 23rd Judicial District (2024) Judge Wojcik authored. The Court found that D.M. and the Cannabis Coalition could not challenge the Treatment Center's medical marijuana policy because D.M. was denied admission for mental health and firearms reasons, not marijuana use, and the Coalition's claimed financial harm was too indirect.
For a more detailed summary, see case summary.
Krasner v. Ward (2023). Judge Wojcik authored a separate concurrence. The Court found that the impeachment of Philadelphia's District Attorney could not go forward because the charges did not properly allege misbehavior in office. Justice Wojcik agreed that some charges were outside the Court's authority but said the other charges were matters for the lawmakers to decide.
For a more detailed summary, see case summary.
Allegheny Reproductive Health Ctr., et al. v. PA DHS, et al. (2021). Judge Wojcik joined the Court's opinion. The Court found that abortion providers could not challenge the Medicaid abortion coverage ban because they were not the patients themselves, and previous court decisions already said that state could fund childbirth but not abortion.
For a more detailed summary, see case summary.
Ziccarelli v. Allegheny County Board of Elections (2020). Judge Wojcik authored a separate dissenting opinion. The Court found that approximately 270 provisional ballots could not be counted because the voters did not meet the Election Code's signature requirement or had already submitted a mail-in ballot, while Judge Wojcik disagreed, saying the voters were qualified and the mistakes were small technical issues.
For a more detailed summary, see case summary.
QUESTIONNAIRE
RIGHT TO LIFE
Was Dobbs v. Jackson rightly decided according to the text of the Constitution? Please explain.
Did not answer
I support a right to accelerate ending a human life.
Did not answer
Human life deserves legal protection from conception until natural death.
Did not answer
RELIGIOUS LIBERTY
Religious liberty is at risk in the United States.
Did not answer
2ND AMENDMENT
The right to bear arms is fundamental and must be protected.
Did not answer
OTHER IMPORTANT ISSUES
Which branch of government do you believe was intended to wield the most authority?
Did not answer
How should the court address public health and individual freedoms in the time of a public health emergency?
Did not answer
JUDICIAL PHILOSOPHY
Which current or past U.S. Supreme Court justice best reflects your judicial philosophy?
Did not answer
Is there a separation of church and state in the Constitution? Please explain.
Did not answer
Should courts address threats to religious liberty in the United States? If so, how?
Did not answer
Was Obergefell v. Hodges rightly decided according to the text of the Constitution? Please explain.
Did not answer
Was Bostock v. Clayton County rightly decided under the law? Please explain.
Did not answer
I agree that “the custody, care and nurture of the child reside first in the parents, whose primary function and freedom include preparation for obligations the state can neither supply nor hinder.” (Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57, 65-66 (2000); quoting Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158, 166 (1944).
Did not answer
What should a judge do when legislative texts and court precedents dictate different results?
Did not answer
When should a judge overturn past court decisions?
Did not answer
When, if ever, should a judge take popular opinion or the social views of the majority into consideration?
Did not answer
Do you believe the meaning of the Constitution changes over time, absent changes through the amendment process of Article V?
Did not answer
What do you believe is the single most important quality a judge should possess?
Did not answer
If you are an incumbent judge, describe a recent instance in which you acted to preserve your judicial independence. If you are an aspiring judge, how do you plan to remain independent if elected to the bench?
Did not answer
ABOUT YOU
What, if any, church or organizations do you belong to?
Did not answer
I voted in these primaries and general elections:
Did not answer
Have you ever been convicted of a felony? If so, please explain.
Did not answer
Have you ever been penalized for sexual misconduct in either civil or criminal court? If so, please explain.
Did not answer
Would you describe your judicial philosophy as originalist, living constitutionalist, or something else? Please explain.
Did not answer
VALUES
Briefly describe your spiritual beliefs and values.
Did not answer
What is your view of parental rights regarding the upbringing of children, specifically education and sexual "identity"?
Did not answer
I support "gender identity" as a specially protected class. Please explain.
Did not answer
What do you believe to be true about the human condition?
Did not answer
EQUALITY
I agree with Critical Race Theory (CRT).
Did not answer
If you are not already receiving our emails, stay up to date with important election alerts, educational articles, and encouraging reminders.