Krasner’s success contrasts with progressive prosecutors facing electoral backlash nationwide.
Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner’s victory in the 2025 Democratic primary—virtually guaranteeing a third term—marks a striking contrast to the fate of several other progressive prosecutors across the country who have lost reelection bids or been removed from office amid rising public anxiety over crime and intensifying political backlash. While figures like Chesa Boudin in San Francisco and Pamela Price in Alameda County have faced tough electoral consequences or organized recalls, Krasner has not only survived but thrived. Why?
To answer that question, we spoke with John Pfaff, a Fordham Law professor and one of the nation’s leading scholars on mass incarceration and criminal justice reform. According to Pfaff, Krasner’s durability illustrates the hyper-local nature of prosecutorial politics, the limitations of recall-based backlash, and the demographic foundations of progressive reform.
A Local, Not National, Story
Pfaff cautions against drawing sweeping conclusions from high-profile losses like Boudin’s 2022 recall or George Gascón’s declining support in Los Angeles. “There’s a sort of gloom hanging over the reform movement nationally,” Pfaff said, “but Krasner’s win reminds us that these politics remain very local. National trends don’t dictate local elections.”
That localized context is crucial. Pfaff argues that the Boudin recall, often used as a bellwether for the supposed demise of progressive prosecution, was not as dramatic a shift as many believed. “Boudin’s initial victory was actually pretty narrow,” he explained. “If you account for exhausted ballots in the ranked-choice election—people who didn’t vote for either Boudin or his main opponent—his support was around 48%. That’s basically the same percentage that voted against his recall.”
In other words, Boudin didn’t lose ground—he simply never had strong majority support. “San Francisco was always demographically unfavorable to reform,” Pfaff added.
The Recall Distortion
A major factor in why prosecutors like Krasner survive where others don’t? Pennsylvania doesn’t allow voter-initiated recalls. “Every major recall effort—Boudin, Gascón, Price—was top-down,” Pfaff said. “These are often funded by wealthy conservatives or business interests, which gives them an outsize influence in places where recalls are legally possible.”
That top-down dynamic contrasts sharply with the more grassroots coalitions that often carry reform-minded prosecutors into office initially. “When you remove the recall mechanism, as in Philadelphia, you remove a tool that disproportionately empowers the wealthy to target and remove officials between regular election cycles,” he said.
Krasner has faced immense criticism—most notably from Donald Trump, Republican state lawmakers who tried to impeach him, and conservative media outlets—but those attacks, Pfaff notes, haven’t translated into political vulnerability because Philadelphia voters ultimately control their own DA’s fate.
Black Voters and the Lived Experience of Crime
Krasner’s enduring support in Philadelphia also reflects his ability to maintain strong ties to the Black community—a critical voting bloc in a city where Black residents make up over 40% of the population.
Pfaff, who has analyzed past electoral data from the city, said, “Krasner tends to perform very well in majority-Black precincts.” That support, he argues, stems from a deeper understanding among Black voters about the dual harms of crime and overly punitive enforcement. “They bear the brunt of both violent crime and the failures of the criminal legal system,” he explained. “So they’re not as swayed by sensationalized media narratives. They’ve seen firsthand that tough-on-crime doesn’t work.”
In contrast, Pfaff notes, white voters—particularly those in suburban or gentrified urban areas—are more reactive to media-driven crime narratives. “White voters are often further from the day-to-day reality of the justice system,” he said. “So they’re more susceptible to backlash over isolated scandals or rising crime rhetoric, even when crime in their own neighborhoods is flat or falling.”
This pattern played out in other cities. In Chicago, Pfaff notes, Cook County State’s Attorney Kim Foxx’s support held steady in Black neighborhoods between 2016 and 2020—even as she lost white voters due in part to the Jussie Smollett controversy. “At the time of her reelection, homicides in Chicago were actually down,” Pfaff said. “But that didn’t matter to white voters reacting to headlines. It mattered to Black voters who live this reality every day.”
Suburbanization and County Geography
Another key variable: geography. Krasner benefits from a quirk of Pennsylvania’s political map—Philadelphia is both a city and a county. That means conservative white suburbs have no say in electing the district attorney.
“That’s huge,” Pfaff said. “In places like Pittsburgh, where the DA serves the entire Allegheny County, the suburbs get to vote—and that’s where the reformer lost in 2023. If you look at the precincts, the reformer actually won the city of Pittsburgh. He even won non-white-majority precincts across the county. But he lost overwhelmingly in 90%-white suburban areas. And that was enough to swing the race.”
This same suburban skew helps explain setbacks elsewhere in California, where county boundaries encompass both urban reform hubs and more conservative suburbs. “So it’s not just race—it’s how voting power is distributed geographically,” Pfaff added.
Krasner’s Coalition and Messaging
Krasner’s coalition appears to include not only Black voters but also a significant share of progressive white voters. “It looks like he’s been able to bring in a broader base than some of his peers,” Pfaff observed. While the full demographic data from the 2025 election is not yet available, early maps suggest support patterns almost identical to those in 2021—indicating remarkable consistency.
That broad coalition has allowed Krasner to absorb years of attacks, including a failed impeachment effort by Republican lawmakers and persistent criticism during pandemic-era crime spikes. And recently, Krasner has leaned into more assertive public safety messaging, while sticking to reform values.
He’s touted falling crime and jail populations, promoted new crime-solving technologies, and emphasized prosecuting violent crimes—while still resisting carceral excess. He even announced a new unit to prosecute illegal dumping, a visible quality-of-life issue in the city.
At the same time, Krasner has positioned himself as a bulwark against Trumpism. His campaign slogan—“F— around and find out”—was featured in TV ads directly attacking the gun lobby, right-wing billionaires, and Trump-aligned forces trying to “take over Philly.”
According to Pfaff, this anti-Trump positioning may have helped mobilize voters. “The initial wave of reform from 2010 to 2015 was partly driven by economic crisis and bipartisan interest in cutting prison budgets,” Pfaff said. “But 2016 to 2020 saw a second wave, largely in response to Trump.”
Whether the current moment marks a high-water mark or a turning point is still unclear. “No one knows where this goes next,” Pfaff admitted. “Things are definitely harder now than in 2016. But whether we’re entering a real retreat or just another cyclical moment is impossible to say.”
For now, Larry Krasner’s success shows that progressive prosecution is not dead—it’s evolving, surviving, and in some places, still winning. The key, Pfaff argues, lies in building durable coalitions rooted in lived experience and local power—not national headlines.
Try and sugarcoat all you want, Americans are waking up to all of the problems and consequences of progressive justice policies.
Pfaff’s conclusion: “No one knows where this goes next,” Pfaff admitted. “Things are definitely harder now than in 2016. But whether we’re entering a real retreat or just another cyclical moment is impossible to say.”
We actually went through a long list of names, and the evidence is far more mixed outside of California – it certainly doesn’t support your dismissive comment.