Independents Challenge Pennsylvania’s Closed Primaries in Push for Broader Voter Access
By: Dr. Kirkpatrick Williams
Published July 20, 2025
A group of four independent voters in Pennsylvania has filed a legal petition with the state’s Supreme Court seeking to overturn the state’s closed primary system. The challengers argue that current rules, which limit participation in partisan primaries to registered Democrats or Republicans, unfairly exclude over one million voters who are unaffiliated with any political party.
The petition contends that the state’s closed primary framework violates constitutional protections related to equal participation and free association by preventing unaffiliated voters from casting ballots in the elections that often determine the eventual officeholders. In many regions of Pennsylvania, particularly in districts where one party dominates, the primary election effectively serves as the deciding contest.
“We’re not asking to change anyone’s vote or disrupt party operations,” said petitioner Sarah Liu, a Pittsburgh-based small business owner. “We’re asking for the right to participate in the democratic process at its most crucial stage.”
Pennsylvania is one of nine U.S. states that maintains fully closed primaries. In such systems, voters who are not registered with a political party are barred from participating in party primaries, even if they are otherwise eligible to vote in general elections. The legal filing asks the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to review the practice in light of changing voter demographics and increasing numbers of independent voters.
The case draws on data showing that more than 15% of registered voters in Pennsylvania are not affiliated with any political party, a figure that has grown steadily over the past decade. Advocates argue that excluding these voters diminishes civic engagement, reduces voter turnout, and undermines the legitimacy of elections decided by a smaller, more partisan segment of the electorate.
Opponents of the challenge, including some state lawmakers and political party representatives, argue that parties have a right to select their candidates without input from non-members. They contend that allowing independents to vote in party primaries could dilute the voices of party-affiliated voters and alter the ideological direction of party platforms.
The outcome of the Pennsylvania case could carry broader implications. Across the country, similar legal and legislative efforts are underway in states such as New York, Florida, and South Dakota, where independent and third-party voters have challenged closed primary systems. In recent years, some states, including California, Washington, and Alaska, have adopted open or top-two primary models, allowing all voters to participate regardless of party affiliation.
Legal scholars say the Pennsylvania challenge could influence how courts interpret voter access in primary elections moving forward. “If the state’s highest court finds merit in the argument that closed primaries violate constitutional principles, it could create a legal roadmap for challenges in other states,” said Professor Elena Carver, an elections law expert at Temple University.
The Pennsylvania Department of State has not yet commented on the pending litigation. A decision from the court could take months, and regardless of the outcome, further appeals or legislative responses may follow.
Meanwhile, the case has reignited debate over electoral reforms and who gets to decide which candidates appear on the November ballot. For the petitioners and others backing the challenge, the hope is to reshape participation rules in a way that reflects the evolving makeup of the American electorate, one in which independent and non-traditional voters are playing an increasingly visible role.
