|
NEW YORK----The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to review if New York State's method of selection of judges violates the First Amendment rights of candidates and voters by using political conventions instead of primaries to pick judicial candidates for the ballot.
Critics have said that political bosses have too much control over the selection process rather than voters.
In September, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed in its entirety the decision of U.S. District Court Judge John Gleeson granting a motion for preliminary injunctive relief in Lopez Torres v. NYS Board of Elections.
The state board of elections and the Republican and Democratic parties have petitioned for the nation's highest court to review the matter and without comment, the Supreme Court granted certiorari.
The state and political parites argue that a 1970s Supreme Court ruling allows states to choose between primaries and conventions for nominations to elected offices.
The case is expected to be argued in the fall.
The Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law, together with pro bono counsel, Arnold & Porter LLP and Jenner & Block LLP, argued that New York's unique convention system, used by the political parties to select their judicial nominees, deprives New Yorkers of their right to cast a meaningful vote for trial court judges.
The Second Circuit's unanimous opinion, authored by Judge Chester Straub, and joined by Judges Sonia Sotomayor and Peter Hall, upheld Judge Gleeson's determination that New York's judicial candidates "have the right to . . . compete for their major party's nomination free from burdens that are both severe and unnecessary" under the First Amendment. The court also found that Judge Gleeson did not err in finding that "the structure of [New York's] primary election, its petitioning requirements, and the delegate lobbying process severely burden First Amendment associational rights." The Second Circuit also upheld Judge Gleeson's remedy, requiring "that nominations be settled by primary election until the State Legislature enacts corrective legislation." The ruling grants voters relief from a system that gives party bosses virtually complete control over the selection process and is an election in name only.
Court documents in the case can be found at
http://www.brennancenter.org/stack_detail.asp?key=102&subkey=34412
2-22-07
All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed by anyone without the express written permission of the publisher. This article is copyright protected.
© 2007 North
Country Gazette
|
