Queens Dems nominate Supreme Court candidates as reformers question process

The Queens County Democratic Party’s judicial delegates meet on Tuesday, Aug. 9, 2022. Eagle photo by Jacob Kaye

By Jacob Kaye

The Queens County Democratic Party nominated four judges to their party’s line to run in the November race for New York State Supreme Court justice on Tuesday night during the party’s annual judicial convention.  

Civil Court Judges Leigh K. Cheng, Nestor Diaz and Denise N. Johnson were nominated by the party’s approximately 170 judicial delegates to run for their first term as Supreme Court justices in the fall. Current-Supreme Court Justice Lee A. Mayersohn was nominated to run for his second 14-year term.

“As we know, from all the things that have been happening, one of the most important positions one can have is when they have to sit in judgment of others,” said Rep. Gregory Meeks, the leader of the Queens Democratic Party. “That is an awesome responsibility.”

“You need someone that is from the people, someone who understands the community, and the opportunity for someone and anyone to have somebody who's going to sit in judgment that has had the same experiences as they have,” he added. “I'm here to tell you today, the four judges that we have nominated today are judges that we can be proud of.”

Though there was little doubt that the judges would receive the party’s nomination – no other candidates were put forth, nor did any of the other 17 who applied for consideration show up to the convention – there were dissenting voices in the room. 

A group of around 30 New Reformers voted against not only each of the candidates presented to them but also against each of the processes votes – such as designating a chairperson of the meeting – taken during the largely pro forma convention. 

Earlier in the day, the New Reformers, most of whom are from Western Queens, had sent a letter to Meeks and the party’s leadership, requesting that some of the processes of the judicial convention be changed to be more “transparent.” 

“We're trying to set a baseline or put it out there what it is we want to see so that we're able to describe the vision of the ideal process,” Émilia Decaudin, a district leader and judicial delegate from Sunnyside, told the Eagle. “We're not just complaining, ‘Oh, it's not transparent,’ and then calling it a day.” 

“We want to be able to point to something that we can work toward and that is an achievable goal for party leadership as well,” she added. 

The letter asks that party leadership improve its communication with delegates, whose only function is to nominate candidates to appear on the ballot. It also asks that party leadership answer a number of questions about the process itself, including when party leaders asked candidates for their resumes, what diversity measures were included in the candidate outreach process and what were the baseline qualifications for determining which candidates be considered by the party. 

“As judicial delegates and alternate delegates, we believe fulfillment of our responsibility to our party constituents requires ensuring a process that is fair, functional, and transparent – as well as culturally and linguistically competent – for the nomination of Democratic judicial candidates,” the letter reads. “We not only insist on the need for a process that meets these standards but gladly offer our assistance in creating and carrying out such a process in time for the next judicial convention.”

Antonio Alfonso Jr., a district leader and the political director of the Queens County Democratic Party, told the Eagle that the letter will be considered. 

“We consider feedback from all corners of the borough,” Alfonso said. 

The results of the Queens County Democratic Party’s judicial convention were largely decided before the convention began, and much of the process is determined by state law.  

In the days leading up to the convention, candidates put their names in for consideration, or were entered on behalf of local Democratic clubs or party members. 

The potential nominees met with the chairperson of the party for an interview and then the chairperson made his recommendations. 

Those recommendations are often not communicated to delegates very far in advance, if at all. A number of delegates told the Eagle that they had first learned about the recommendations after reading a story published by the Eagle on Monday. 

A change was made this year, in response to concerns, and the resumes of each of the 17 candidates who applied were posted publicly on the party’s website about a week before the convention. 

During the convention, the chair of the convention – Tuesday’s meeting was presided over by former Appellate Division Judge Randall T. Eng – called on predetermined delegates to formally nominate the candidates previously recommended by Meeks. 

An oral vote was then taken on each of the candidates. 

The New Reformers say that the process lacks transparency and doesn’t allow for adequate time to vet the judges, many of whom have lengthy careers that may be hard to decipher for non-legal professionals. 

“[The ‘nay’ votes] weren’t really even a reflection of our feelings on the candidates themselves, more so a lack of real information to make any kind of deep assessment,” said Nick Berkowitz, a first-time delegate from Sunnyside and New Reformer. 

“This is not obstructionist, this is not about trying to take over the process for the sake of wanting to take it over,” he added. “It's opaque processes like these that send the message to the public that government isn't for you. It doesn't care what you think, or what you need it, and to me, that’s not the message that the Democratic Party should be sending.”

Some New Reformers said they felt let down by the convention, which requires a lot of work to get to – judicial delegates’ only role is to attend the convention. 

“We have to go through this whole election process and it takes so much time and energy to get on the ballot, and then you actually have to win, and then you go to this one meeting where it feels like you might not be able to do anything” said Zachariah Boyer, a New Reformer. “It's so much of a barrier.”

A number of New Reformers told the Eagle that while they object to the process by which the candidates are chosen, the candidates often appear to have the proper make-up to serve as a judges in Queens, even if that determination couldn’t be made beforehand. On Tuesday, candidates gave speeches to the delegates after they had received the party’s formal nomination. 

Party leadership appears to be making a concerted effort to diversify the bench in what is the most diverse county in the United States, a number of sources told the Eagle. 

Nearly 60 percent of elected Supreme Court justices in Queens are white, according to a 2021 report from the Office of Court Administration. Around 13 percent are Black and around 17 percent are Latino. There were only two Asian American justices on the bench, according to the report which was compiled with self-reported data. 

Last year, the party nominated the first South Asian woman to serve in New York Supreme Court. This year, they nominated an Asian American, Latino American, Black and white judge to the bench. 

Representatives from ethnic bar associations in Queens, including the Latino Lawyers Association and the South Asian Indo-Caribbean Bar Association said they have had success putting forth recommendations to party leadership. 

“Chairman Meeks, to his credit, has been very receptive and open to dialogue with us about our concerns and he seems to have been responding in kind the past couple of years,” said Thomas Oliva, the president of the Latino Lawyers Association and a former candidate for Civil Court judge in Queens. 

Who will be on the ballot in November?

(From left to right) Judges Leigh K. Cheng, Nestor Diaz and Lee A. Mayersohn received the Queens County Democratic Party’s nomination for Supreme Court justice on Tuesday, Aug. 9, 2022. Judge Denise N. Johnson also received the party’s support but was unable to attend the judicial convention. Eagle photo by Jacob Kaye

Cheng is an elected Civil Court judge in Queens who is currently serving in Brooklyn Criminal Court. He was first elected in 2020. 

Prior to his election to the bench, he served for 12 years as the principal law secretary to Mayersohn, who was nominated for reelection on Tuesday. He’s also served as a court attorney in Queens Civil Court and as a legislative counsel to former Assemblymember Nettie Mayersohn, the mother of Lee Mayhersohn.

“Really, all I've ever done is work in the courthouse,” Cheng told the delegates Tuesday. “Twenty years in the court system have honed my legal skills – if there's anything I'm going to be good at, it's working in the courts and being a judge.”

Diaz, like Cheng, was elected to serve as a Queens County Civil Court judge in 2020 but is currently sitting on the Criminal Court bench in Manhattan. 

Diaz had a private practice as an attorney for two decades prior to his election to the bench, and worked as an assistant district attorney in the Kings County district attorney’s office before that. 

“[Diversity on the bench] is so important…for a judiciary to reflect the people that it serves, to understand the people that it serves, to look like the people so they could see themselves in the judiciary and trust in a system,” Diaz said. “It helps legitimize our democracy, especially Queens.”

Mayersohn currently presides over guardianship matters in the Civil Term. He also presides over foreclosure actions. 

He previously served in the Queens County Civil Court and as the commissioner of the New York City Tax Commission from 1989 through 2004.

Mayersohn told the delegates that he hopes to continue serving those who come before him in his court parts. 

“It is my intention to continue to do what I've always done, protect those who are unable to care for themselves, ensure that they may live their lives with dignity and the respect that they deserve, free from financial exploitation and abuse, and to do so in the least restrictive manner possible,” Mayersohn said. 

Johnson, who was unable to attend Tuesday’s convention, was elected as a Civil Court judge in 2020, and is currently serving on the Queens County Criminal Court. Johnson ran unopposed and was rated “not approved” by the New York City Bar Association in 2020. 

From 2006 until her election, Johnson served as the principal law secretary to Supreme Court Justice Janice A. Taylor.

In addition to having her own legal practice, Johnson worked as assistant corporation counsel in the New York City Law Department focusing on real estate litigation and tort law. 

The Queens Republican Party will meet in the coming days to nominate their own slate of judicial candidates, though, if precedent holds, the party will likely nominate most, if not all, of those nominated by the Democrats, as well as a few Republican candidates.