Senate rejects governor's chief judge pick
/
Chief judge nominee Hector LaSalle was rejected by the State Senate’s Judiciary Committee on Wednesday, Jan. 18, 2023. The action is unprecedented and sets up a potential political showdown between the governor and the state legislature. AP photo by Hans Pennink
By Jacob Kaye
Governor Kathy Hochul’s controversial nominee for New York State’s highest judicial position, Hector LaSalle, was rejected by the State Senate’s Judiciary Committee on Wednesday following an unusually drawn out hearing, potentially setting the stage for a legal battle between the state’s top executive and the legislature.
Only two of the committee’s 19 members – Senators Kevin Thomas and Luis Sepúlveda – voted in favor of approving LaSalle, who currently presides over the busiest court in the state, the Appellate Division, Second Department. Ten Senators, including Brad Hoylman, the chair of the committee, and each of the committee’s Queens members – Jessica Ramos, John Liu and Toby Ann Stavisky – voted against advancing the judge’s nomination to the full Senate. Each of the committee’s Republican members and one Democrat, Senator Jamaal Bailey, voted to advance LaSalle to the full body without a formal recommendation.
It was the first time in New York history that a chief judge nominee, or even a nominee for the Court of Appeals, has been rejected by lawmakers.
After a month of public debate over Hochul’s nomination and the brewing political fight between the recently-elected executive and the progressive wing of the state legislature, the committee vote comes as a major blow to the governor, who has been stumping and calling in favors to get LaSalle confirmed as the state’s next chief judge of the Court of Appeals.
What comes next isn’t entirely clear.
Hochul, who has reportedly begun speaking with attorneys, could sue the Senate in an effort to bring LaSalle’s nomination to the floor. She allegedly intends to argue that the judicial nomination procedure is defined by the state’s constitution and not the leader of the legislature.
Alternatively, she could admit defeat in her first battle with the lawmakers since taking office for her first full term as governor and restart the process of selecting a chief judge. Restarting the process would likely mean the Commission on Judicial Nomination would again solicit applications, select seven candidates to send to the governor who would then select a single candidate and send them to the Senate for confirmation.
And while no decision has been officially made yet, Hochul appeared to be leaning toward legal action following Wednesday’s vote.
"While this was a thorough hearing, it was not a fair one, because the outcome was predetermined,” Hochul said in a statement. “Several Senators stated how they were going to vote before the hearing even began – including those who were recently given seats on the newly expanded Judiciary Committee. While the Committee plays a role, we believe the Constitution requires action by the full Senate."
Hoylman, who hadn’t confirmed which way he intended to vote prior to the hearing but voted against LaSalle on Wednesday, closed the hearing without much further instruction.
“The nomination is lost and we will proceed based on that information,” Hoylman said.
The closing words, which were used to cut off a Republican motion to advance LaSalle to the full Senate floor despite the vote, solicited jeers from the dozens of LaSalle supporters who had been vocal in their approval of the judge throughout the day.
Sen. Brad Hoylman asks New York Gov. Kathy Hochul's Chief Judge of the Court of Appeals nominee, Hector LaSalle, questions during testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday, Jan. 18, 2023, in Albany. AP photo by Hans Pennink
Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins gave no indication that LaSalle’s nomination would be brought to the full Senate following the committee’s rejection, noting that she believed Hochul’s next steps should be to make a new nomination for chief judge.
“We had the hearing we said we would always provide,” the Senate leader told reporters. “The committee has spoken. The nomination was lost and I’m hoping we can move forward.”
The nearly five-hour long hearing was unusual for the State Senate, which typically pushes through judicial nominations without much public questioning. LaSalle’s nomination, however, has been different from past nominations, including that of former Chief Judge Janet DiFiore, who was widely disliked by lawmakers and legal professionals throughout the state.
LaSalle’s judicial record has been widely criticized by progressive lawmakers and advocates, as well as union officials and some moderate Democrats in the weeks since Hochul first announced her pick for chief judge. Over a dozen Senators, including a handful on the Judiciary Committee, publicly announced their intention to vote against LaSalle days after Hochul nominated him.
In his defense, a group of Latino legal professionals and former elected officials launched a campaign dubbed Latinos for LaSalle in support of the judge, accusing his opponents of misconstruing his record and using him as fodder for their larger political fight against Hochul. The effort was supported by Citizens for Judicial Fairness, an opaque former pro-business group that has mostly focused its advocacy efforts on the Delaware courts and is supported by the powerful New York City lobbying firm Tusk Strategies.
Supporters rally for New York Gov. Kathy Hochul's Chief Judge of the Court of Appeals nominee, Hector LaSalle, on Wednesday, Jan. 18, 2023, in Albany. AP photo by Hans Pennink
Though the debate over LaSalle has raged on for weeks, Wednesday’s hearing offered New Yorkers their first opportunity to hear directly from the judge himself.
In his opening remarks, LaSalle, a Long Island native, told the story of his family’s immigration to the U.S., and their long history of union membership – one of the main criticisms of LaSalle is over a decision in which he ruled a defamation case brought by Cablevision could proceed against two individual union members.
“I remember as a child walking the picket line [with my grandmother],” LaSalle said. “[My family] would be so proud to see me sit here today and to know that the odyssey to New York was worth it.”
But the story did little to assuage the concerns of the lawmakers, who referred back to the Cablevision case at least a dozen times during their questioning. Lawmakers also frequently questioned LaSalle’s decision to sign onto an appellate decision issued in People v. Bridgeforth, which determined that a member of a jury could be struck because of their skin color. The ruling was later overturned by the Court of Appeals.
LaSalle defended the decision, and all others that were questioned on Wednesday.
“You should look at the record,” he told the lawmakers. “But I only ask that this body look at my entire record, not only the record that certain advocates have chosen to look at – you can look at those, I think it's entirely fair – I only ask that you look at the other ones and give those equal weight.”
Though LaSalle ultimately did not receive their votes, a number of Republican members of the committee appeared more friendly in their questioning of LaSalle. Several of the lawmakers also frequently questioned the political nature of the hearing and the debate leading up to it.
“You do not come across as a right wing conservative nut,” said Republican Senator Andrew Lanza.
Following the hearing, Republican Leader Rob Ortt said that he believed the committee had “failed to follow its Constitutional responsibility to allow the nomination…to proceed to a full Senate vote.”
“[T]he radical majority members of the Judiciary Committee put their far-left politics ahead of their obligation to the people of New York, effectively blocking Justice LaSalle from becoming the first Latino chief judge of the Court of Appeals,” Ortt said. “We believe this nomination is due consideration by the full Senate, where it should be considered with an open mind based on his qualifications, not politics.”
Several of the Democratic Senators who voted against LaSalle are moderate Democrats, including Stavisky.
A number of Democratic lawmakers expressed concern on Wednesday that LaSalle would continue in the tradition of DiFiore, who led a slim conservative majority on the Court of Appeals for the past several years.
Though LaSalle refrained from directly answering any questions about his personal political leanings or his assessment of the high court’s leanings, he did appear to distance himself from the former chief judge.
At the start of the hearing, Hoylman questioned why LaSalle listed DiFiore as a professional reference on his application for chief judge. He also asked LaSalle if he considered DiFiore a professional mentor and about several rulings that he made that DiFiore went on to uphold.
“[I don’t regard her] as a professional mentor, but certainly as a colleague and someone that I worked with,” LaSalle said, adding that he had been “reversed by Judge DiFiore on more than one occasion.”
While LaSalle’s hearing was tense, at times, and often combative, he did receive support. Most of it came from Sepúlveda, who has been vocal in his praise of the judge over the course of the past several weeks.
“There's been a character assassination and misinformation about your cases,” the lawmaker said on Wednesday.
LaSalle defended his decisions throughout the day. At times, it seemed as though his explanation of decisions and the added context in some of the cases appeared to sway some lawmakers.
“I believe that’s simply a mischaracterization intended to derail my nomination,” he said of the Cablevision case, which has caused advocates and lawmakers to label him as anti-union. “But it's certainly not an accurate characterization of who I am.”
