Judge rules full Senate must vote on a governor's judicial nominees

Stepping into New York’s hottest political fight of the year so far, a state judge ruled Tuesday that the full State Senate must vote on a governor’s judicial nominees, not just a Senate committee.

The ruling, if upheld, could set the course for judicial nominations going forward.

But it won’t change the fortunes of Hector LaSalle, Gov. Kathy Hochul’s nominee to be New York’s chief judge who — in an unprecedented power move by the Senate — was voted down by the full Senate last week.

Hochul, a Democrat, found herself battling fellow Democrats in the Senate who want someone more liberal than LaSalle, a former Suffolk County prosecutor who lives in East Northport, to lead the Court of Appeals, New York’s top court.

In January, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted, 10-9, against advancing LaSalle’s nomination to the full Senate and declared the nomination dead.

But Hochul and the Republicans — in an unusual alliance — argued that the state constitution mandates a vote of the full Senate on judicial nominations, unlike, say, nominees to become state agency commissioners.

After weeks went by without Hochul acting, Sen. Anthony Palumbo (R-New Suffolk) filed suit on Feb. 9 to force a vote.

Hoping to render the lawsuit moot, Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins (D-Yonkers) called a vote of the full Senate last Wednesday, and the LaSalle nomination was defeated, 39-20, almost strictly along party lines.

It’s the first time in New York history that the Senate rejected a governor’s judicial nominee.

But Palumbo argued that the lawsuit should continue in case of future procedural standoffs.

Justice Thomas Whelan, of the state Supreme Court in Suffolk County, agreed Tuesday with Palumbo not only on the need for a decision but also on the substance.

“An unnecessary constitutional crisis arose in the past month, which has left the New York State Court of Appeals without a chief judge and the entire state judiciary without desperately needed leadership,” Whelan wrote in a nine-page decision. “It is time for this constitutional logjam to be broken asunder.”

Whelan said Democrats, in trying to halt the proceedings by a Judiciary Committee vote, were attempting an improper “procedural shortcut.”

“The judiciary committee does not have the constitutional duty for ‘advice and consent.’ The constitution clearly states that this power is reserved to the Senate,” Whelan wrote. “The judiciary committee can aid the full Senate by performing an investigative function, but it cannot substitute for the power reserved to the Senate by the constitution.”

Stewart-Cousins could appeal. The Senate Democrats were reviewing Whelan’s decision, a spokesman said Tuesday.

Palumbo applauded the ruling and called Senate Democrats’ action “reckless.”

“Today’s decision is a win for the citizens of New York,” Palumbo said.

Hochul didn’t immediately comment. Per state law, the state Commission on Judicial Nomination is screening candidates to forward to Hochul to make a new nomination. The seven-member Court of Appeals still is operating with one vacancy, as it has since last summer.

By Yancey Roy

yancey.roy@newsday.com@yanceyroy