Leading Pennsylvania Republican legislators claim two Democrats on the state Supreme Court — including Lansford native Christine Donohue — may have been biased in signing on to a mandate to redistrict Pennsylvania’s congressional districts.

In the meantime, on Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court turned down a Republican request to postpone redrawing congressional district lines. The result could be more favorable districts for the Democrats. Associate Justice Samuel A. Alito, who hears emergency requests from the state, turned down the GOP petition, but it brought criticism from some of his court colleagues.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled in January that the state’s Republican legislative leaders had violated the state constitution by unfairly favoring the GOP and gave the General Assembly until Feb. 9 to redraw the map.

Like Tom Brady in Sunday’s Super Bowl, the Republicans have heaved a Hail Mary,” claiming that Justice David Wecht, who was elected to the state high court in 2015, had criticized the congressional map while campaigning, contending it was gerrymandered in favor of the Republicans.

Judicial candidates are prohibited from commenting or giving opinions on matters that might come before them if they are elected.

In their U.S. Supreme Court filing, State Senate President Pro Tem Joseph Scarnati and House Speaker Mike Turzai had contended that Wecht should have disqualified himself from participating in the state Supreme Court decision.

The Republicans are also asking the state Supreme Court to throw out its own order to redraw the map because of the alleged bias of Wecht and possibly Democrat Donohue, of whom they were also critical because of her comments published in a 2015 article when she, too, was running for office.

Democrats own a 5-2 majority on the state Supreme Court, and four of the five voted to redraw the congressional map, saying that it was illegally gerrymandered. Democrat Max Baer joined the two Republicans on the court to disagree with the majority decision.

The term gerrymandering means drawing district lines in such a way as to benefit one party over another.

Despite Democrats having about a million more registered voters in Pennsylvania than Republicans, the GOP holds 13 of the 18 congressional seats. Democrats point to this imbalance as the need to redraw the map and to do it in time for the 2018 midterm elections.

All 435 members of the U.S. House of Representatives are up for re-election this year. The problem is, however, that state legislators, who are tasked with coming up with the new map, now have just three days to do it. Gov. Tom Wolf, who agrees that the map is out of whack, has until Feb. 15 to sign off on whatever the legislators come up with.

With the Republicans bringing legal action, the question remains as to whether this complicated process can be completed in such a short time frame. Democrats claim it can, thanks to the speed and efficiency of computer technology.

To further complicate the issue, a lawyer for Scarnati said the senator will not comply with the state Supreme Court directive to turn over voter records and mapmaking materials.

The map must be in place in time for the May 15 primary elections. Some candidates, who have already announced their intention to run for congressional seats, may find themselves in different districts than the ones in which they now reside.

Although the state Constitution allows any legal Pennsylvania resident to run in any district in the state, historically it is very difficult for someone to be elected in a district in which he or she does not reside.

In assailing Wecht’s impartiality, the Republican leaders pointed to his remarks at a 2015 campaign forum. Wecht said: There are a million more Democrats in this commonwealth — I want to let that sink in — but there’s a Republican Statehouse, there’s a Republican state Senate, and there are only five Democrats in the Congress, as opposed to 13 Republicans, Think about it.”

Scarnati and Turzai said that since Wecht did not recuse himself from the redistricting decision, the order should be thrown out.

As for Donohue, although the Republicans did not necessarily accuse her of being biased in her decision, they allege that her comments during the 2015 campaign raise questions about her impartiality, too. During the campaign, she said that the state Supreme Court reviews challenges to lines drawn by the redistricting committee that is made up of top Republican and Democratic legislative leaders and a fifth member chosen by the other four.

In the event that the four cannot agree on the fifth member, Donohue said, the state Supreme Court chooses the person. As a result, she added, the court could influence the process twice. She suggested that if voters in 2015 selected all three Democratic candidates — her, Wecht and Kevin Dougherty — all the court would need to do is to apply the law. In that case, Donohue said, Gerrymandering will come to an end.”

Donohue’s statement calls her impartiality into question, the Republicans said. Although they are not asking for Donohue’s disqualification, as they are Wecht’s, they are demanding that she disclose all relevant information about statements she has made concerning gerrymandering or the makeup of the congressional map.

By Bruce Frassinelli | tneditor@tnonline.com