Judicial Reports: THE CARD


By John Ennis

Posted 11-17-2006


Earlier this year, New York’s Supreme Court judicial selection system (where party bosses choose which candidates will appear on the ballot) was ruled unconstitutional by a federal court. LexMetrics will summarize the major players (and their positions) in the battle to reform the current process.

 

PLAYERS

 

ROLE
POSITION
New York Supreme Court Justices

Unsuccessful Defendant-Intervenors
in federal litigation that found current selection system unconstitutional.

 

Adamantly oppose open primaries. Have appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The Brennan Center for Justice
Plaintiffs in federal litigation that found current system unconstitutional.

Threatening further litigation if changes don’t address increasing voter participation.

 

The Feerick Commission
Chartered by the court system, recently completed a three-year study on judicial reform.

Skeptical of open primaries.  Recommends a more open judicial nominating system.

 

The New York State Bar Association
Not a litigant in the federal dispute.

Prefers a merit-based selection system that would remove politics from the process. (This would take at least three years to enact).

 

New York County Lawyers' Association
Not a litigant in the federal dispute.

Long-time advocates of a merit-based selection system.

 

The New York Legislature

Assembly Judiciary Committee has
begun hearings on reforming current system.

The Senate has passed a bill that would create an open primary. The Assembly has proposed the creation of screening panels for candidates. There is scant evidence of a consensus at this stage.

 

Governor-Elect Eliot Spitzer
Successfully petitioned federal court to give the state till 2007 to reform the system.

Favors merit-selection by the Governor. Would push for an amendment to the state Constitution ending judicial elections.

 

The Federal Courts

Eastern District of New York held, and U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed, that current selection system is unconstitutional. Ordered Legislature to reform it before the next (2007) election.

 

The U.S. Supreme Court has yet to decide whether to hear the appeal.

Posted by Ennis on November 17, 2006 08:20 AM to Judicial Reports