Pennsylvania Supreme Court Rules Philly Judicial Candidate Ineligible for Primary Election

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has ruled that Mike Huff, a candidate for judicial positions in Philadelphia, is ineligible to participate in the upcoming May 20 primary election. This decision, announced on Wednesday, answered a residency challenge that emerged just days before mail-in ballots were distributed, bearing Huff’s name alongside a notification regarding the ongoing review of his candidacy.

The controversy surrounding Huff’s eligibility stemmed from questions about his residency status after he relocated from Bala Cynwyd to Philadelphia in May 2022. Opponents of his candidacy expressed skepticism about his commitment to actually living in the city, pointing out that his wife, a Democratic committeeperson in Montgomery County, continued to reside in Bala Cynwyd, further fueling concerns that Huff’s move was strategically timed to facilitate his run for office.

In response to the challenge, Huff’s campaign characterized the opposition as an effort by the Democratic City Committee and its chairman, Bob Brady, to marginalize progressive candidates within the party. Brady, however, maintained that his actions were motivated by a desire to ensure that only qualified candidates who genuinely reside in Philadelphia appear on the ballot.

Following the Supreme Court’s ruling, Brady issued a statement expressing his commitment to presenting voters with candidates who are rooted in the city and understand its community values. In a video message shared on social media, Huff reaffirmed his dedication to Philadelphia, asserting that he will continue to engage with local communities and represent clients through his extensive legal experience.

During a prior court hearing regarding Huff’s residency, the candidate did not deny the circumstances of his living arrangements but framed them as a reflection of his long-held intention to return to Philadelphia, where he originally lived with his wife after their marriage. Despite having raised a family in Bala Cynwyd and serving as a public defender in Montgomery County, Huff claimed to have maintained an active social and civic presence in Philadelphia, contributing to local political campaigns and advocating for various community causes.

To substantiate his case in court, Huff provided evidence, including W-2 forms and utility bills from his Mount Airy apartment, along with testimonies from neighbors. However, Commonwealth Court Judge Lori A. Dumas assessed Huff’s claims critically, citing the residency code stipulating that a married individual’s residence is determined by where their family resides. Dumas previously ruled against Huff, declaring him ineligible, yet the Pennsylvania Supreme Court later remanded the case for further examination.

Despite a reevaluation of the evidence, Judge Dumas ultimately reaffirmed her initial judgment, concluding that Huff’s utility bills indicated insufficient residency in Philadelphia. Even testimonies from neighbors were met with skepticism due to perceived biases within landlord-tenant dynamics.

As Philadelphia approaches its primary elections, the focus remains on the implications of this ruling, with electoral officials navigating the challenges of ballot distribution amid legal disputes over candidate eligibility.