(Washington Insider Magazine) For the Democratic majority leaders this is a closed chapter. But there is a possibility that Governor Hochul will go to court to press another confirmation session.
Is the name of Judge Héctor LaSalle, the first Latino in history nominated to preside over New York’s highest court, completely crossed off the list? Does the vote by a state senate judiciary committee, which denied his nomination this Wednesday, mean the last word?
Given the two previous questions, until this Friday there were many interpretations. Although everything indicates that it will only depend on the political will of Governor Kathy Hochul to continue defending her position with “cloak and dagger” before state legislators, before what she described as a “selection based on the best credentials, but evaluated in an unfair hearing.”
In fact, the question remains whether the state president will go to court to request a new vote: “We are considering all options,” she said Thursday.
That step continues to be pushed by groups supporting LaSalle’s rise as Chief Justice of the New York Court of Appeals.
The Doubt
Specifically, the great doubt that persists is around the interpretation of the state Constitution, which specifies that a judge of the Court of Appeals nominated by a governor must be confirmed with the “advice and consent” of the Senate.
At this point, it’s not entirely explicit whether the members of the 19-member judiciary committee who voted to stop this appointment this week adequately represent that entire legislative chamber.
Technical interpretations as to whether LaSalle’s nomination “is still alive” and must now undergo a new voting process, with the full House, persist because the Senate has not rejected any candidate to preside over the Court of Appeals, since it was implemented this system in the 1970s.
“Still Stands”
There are already different opinions. For example, the former chief judge of the state of New York, Jonathan Lippman, who also joined the main voices of “Latinos for LaSalle”, considered that there are technical elements to consider that the nomination “still stands”, because it has not been submitted to a vote by all members of the Senate.
“From my point of view, in accordance with the law, this nomination must be denied or confirmed in a full session of the Senate. It does not exist in the language of the Constitution that the last word in this matter depends firmly on the decision of a committee”, the jurist asserted.
Lippman indicated that ultimately what is at stake is not a charge, but that constitutional procedures be mocked in the midst of political polarization.
“Any other way of doing this is a threat to the constitutional design. LaSalle has all the credentials to be confirmed. And he deserves an upcoming fair hearing where his credentials, merits, and legal rationality are verified. Not a political debate between left and right, ”he said.
Senate: “There is Nothing to Review”
When the name of Héctor LaSalle appeared as Gov. Kathy Hochul’s nominee on December 22, several groups, including progressive Democratic lawmakers, made clear their fears that the record of the judge, born on Long Island and of Puerto Rican parents, , pointed out that he will align himself with the conservative judges in the Court of Appeals.
In short, his critics have defined LaSalle as “anti-abortion, anti-union, anti-immigrant and anti-due process”, after putting on the table a series of “controversial” sentences with which he has been associated in 14 years of judicial career.
In contrast, various organizations, bar associations, and elected leaders of the Democratic Party continue to reject the “conservative” label, noting that the judicial committee did not follow the process of reviewing his credentials. Which culminated in a vote on Wednesday that it’s unclear if he simply chilled or stopped his nomination altogether.
On this road that seems complicated, the majority leader in the Senate, Andrea Stewart-Cousins outlined her position, making it clear that in her opinion there is nothing more to review: “There are those who do not accept the role of the Senate in this process. And they won’t be happy unless we simply act on their behalf.”
But in an interview with local media, Judiciary Committee Chairman Brad Hoylman-Sigal reasoned that under the New York Constitution, the state Senate is within its powers, like the state Assembly, to set its own rules on How to proceed with the nominations.
“We use a committee process, simple as that,” the Manhattan Democrat said.
This article is authored by Fernando Martínez.