Wilson clears first chief judge hurdle

Governor Kathy Hochul's chief judge of the Court of Appeals nominee, Rowan Wilson, gives testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee Monday, April 17, 2023, in Albany. AP photo by Hans Pennink

By Jacob Kaye

For the second time this year, the State Senate’s Judiciary Committee peppered a governor’s pick for chief judge with questions about their past decisions, their judicial philosophy and their thoughts on the future of New York’s courts.

Compared to the committee’s February hearing over the nomination of Judge Hector LaSalle, Monday’s hearing about the nomination of Judge Rowan Wilson was far less contentious or grand – it was, however, nearly just as long.

Wilson, who has served as an associate justice of the Court of Appeals since 2017, appeared before the committee on Monday, where he answered questions from senators for a little over 3 hours. With the exception of several questions about one opinion that victim’s rights advocates have raised concerns over in the past several days, Wilson’s hearing was mostly uncontroversial, a major change from the hearing of LaSalle, which created a battle between Senate Democrats and the governor that nearly resulted in a constitutional crisis.

The Judiciary Committee voted 16 to 3 to send Wilson’s nomination for a vote to the full Senate, where it will likely pass.

“The chief judge should be someone who is independent and impartial, who has a firm understanding of the role of an apex court in our tripartite system of government, is a creative problem solver, values the ideas and opinions of others and is motivated by a genuine love of the law,” Wilson told the committee during his opening remarks.

“What we need now more than anything, is a steadying influence on both the jurisprudential and administrative sides [of the Court of Appeals],” he added. “Those are the objectives that I would set for myself were I to serve as chief judge, and the standards to which I would expect to be held.”

Wilson was nominated for the most powerful judicial position in the state by Governor Kathy Hochul earlier this month. Alongside Wilson, Hochul nominated powerful attorney Caitlin Halligan to serve in the vacancy on the court Wilson would create should he be confirmed by the Senate. Halligan is set to appear before the Judiciary Committee on Tuesday.

If confirmed, Wilson will become the first Black man to serve as chief judge, a position that includes ruling over New York’s highest court as well as guiding the state’s entire court system.

Wilson’s nomination follows the bitter battle between Hochul and Senate Democrats over LaSalle’s nomination, which resulted in the first-ever rejection of a chief judge candidate. LaSalle received opposition from a number of Democratic lawmakers over a handful of previous decisions and a belief that he’d rule over a conservative majority on the court. Those same detractors have thrown their weight behind Wilson, who they see as a leading liberal voice on the court.

“As an Associate Judge on the Court of Appeals for the last six years, Judge Wilson has distinguished himself as a tireless champion of marginalized people,” said Peter Martin, the director of judicial accountability at the Center for Community Alternatives, which led the charge against LaSalle. “Judge Wilson’s nomination and likely confirmation is a victory for New Yorkers and a testament to the value of public engagement around judicial nominations.”

“Since last summer, we have called for a new Chief Judge who has demonstrated a commitment to safeguarding the rights of New Yorkers and protecting the most vulnerable,” Martin added. “By building a powerful coalition, laying out our priorities early, and holding the line against a nominee who fell short of what our state deserves, we have set the bar for Court of Appeals nominations—and we have succeeded in getting a Chief Judge nominee who clears that bar.”

A controversial case

During LaSalle’s January hearing, Democratic Senators grilled the sitting presiding justice of the Appellate Division, Second Department, on a number of past decisions the judge made, citing concerns they said they had about his position on defendants’ rights, women’s abortion rights and unionized workers’ rights.

LaSalle’s hearing was the longest and most comprehensive questioning of a chief judge nominee since the chief judge nomination system was first implemented in the 1970s.

Even without the same controversy surrounding the nominee, lawmakers on Monday continued with the approach they showed during LaSalle’s hearing, asking Wilson about several of his past decisions and his judicial philosophy during a hearing that was far longer than hearings for past chief judge nominees.

The most discussed decision Monday was People v. Regan, a case in which the Court of Appeals overturned a guilty verdict found in a lower court against an alleged rapist. The decision, which Wilson penned, was issued last month.

Women’s rights organization NOW NYC objected to Wilson’s nomination because of his ruling in the case. State Senator Brad Hoylman-Sigal, who chairs the Judiciary Committee, opened his questioning with a discussion about the case.

“Advocates for sexual assault survivors worried that the ruling is insensitive to victims and will will discourage prosecutors from bringing excessive sexual assault charges moving forward,” Hoylman-Sigal said. “How do you balance these competing priorities to protect the societal interests [like speedy trial] and protecting victims?”

As he did in his decision, Wilson laid the blame on the prosecutors and the police in the case, who he said violated the defendant’s right to a speedy trial by delaying their efforts to obtain DNA evidence.

“In this case, the police and prosecutors did not take defendant’s constitutional rights or the complainant’s sexual assault seriously; they did not act expeditiously with regard to either,” he wrote in the decision.

On Monday he said: “It's a terrible feeling to have to reverse a conviction.”

“It’s quite clear that when a guilty person’s conviction is overturned, the victim suffers,” he said, adding that he believes that the right to a speedy trial should be upheld for all New Yorkers.

Running the state’s court system

A large portion of the questions Wilson received Monday concerned how he’d approach running the Court of Appeals, and the state’s court system as a whole.

To start, Wilson said he’d increase the workload of the state’s top court, which saw a major reduction in the number of cases it heard under former Chief Judge Janet DiFiore.

“It's very difficult to be the nationally preeminent court of any kind, if you're deciding fewer and fewer and fewer cases,” Wilson said.

Under DiFiore, the Court of Appeals heard 40 percent fewer cases than it did under Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman, who preceded DiFiore.

“It's a drastic reduction in the areas of law we hope to effect,” Wilson said.

If confirmed, Wilson said that he would consider making a number of changes to the way the Court of Appeals interacts with the rest of the court system.

To begin, Wilson said he would reverse a policy implemented by DiFiore, which instructed Appellate Division courts to halt the granting of leave in criminal cases, a policy that has resulted in fewer cases being sent to the top court.

“I just have a fundamentally different view about the way the state constitution reads,” Wilson said. “The state constitution gives the Appellate Division departments the power to send us cases, and I don't think we should be in the business of telling them to stop doing it.”

Wilson also said that he’d consider changing the way the seven Court of Appeals judges go about hearing cases. Under DiFiore, the amount of time the judges spent discussing a case together significantly reduced, according to Wilson. In the past year, acting Chief Judge Anthony Cannataro – who was also recommended for the chief judge position – has lengthened the amount of time they discuss cases, according to the nominee. On Monday, Wilson said he’d consider making those conferences even longer.

Wilson was also asked about a number of issues currently facing the court system as a whole, including backlogs in courts throughout the state and under-funded and under-staffed legal services provider firms.

Cannataro, who has been running the court since last fall, has thus far refused calls from public defenders to slow the calendering of Housing Court cases. The city has struggled to implement the Right to Counsel law, which guarantees tenants of a certain income an attorney when facing eviction proceedings.

Public defenders have been unable to meet the demand and have requested that the court system adjourn cases in which a tenant has not been assigned an attorney.

Wilson did not commit to slowing the calendering of cases or halting proceedings until all tenants are given an attorney on Monday.

“I think the key is to take steps to provide the representation that has been promised,” Wilson said.

The nominee also said that he believes that 18-B attorneys, or private attorneys who represent indigent defendants and children and who are paid for by the state, should receive raises – the attorneys have not received a raise in two decades and the issue is currently being litigated as a result of several lawsuits.

For a number of questions concerning the court system’s functioning, Wilson expressed confidence in current Appellate Division, Second Department Judge Joseph Zayas, who Wilson said he’d tap as chief administrative judge if confirmed. Zayas, who previously served as the administrative judge of Queens Supreme Court, Criminal Term, was in attendance during Monday’s hearing.