First Amendment topicsAbout the First Amendment
News Story
 
Supreme Court to review N.Y. judicial-selection process

By The Associated Press
02.20.07

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court today agreed to review whether New York state’s method of picking trial judges violates the Constitution by giving too much power to political bosses.

Lower federal courts have ruled that the selection process, using political conventions instead of primaries to decide which candidates make the general election ballot, violates the First Amendment rights of candidates and voters.

The justices agreed without comment to consider the appeal from New York state election officials and the Democratic and Republican parties that the 1974 Supreme Court ruling American Party of Texas v. White allows states to choose between primaries and conventions for nominations to elected offices.

The case is expected to be argued in the fall.

Between 1990 and 2002, almost half the elections to the New York State Supreme Court were uncontested. Despite its name, the court is a trial court, not the state’s highest. The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals called the elections “little more than ceremony” in upholding a challenge brought in 2004 by a watchdog group, the Brennan Center for Justice.

Critics have said the conventions are patronage-driven affairs in which allies of party leaders are rewarded with judgeships and all others shut out.

The state has defended the process as open and vigorously contested.

The Mid-Manhattan branch of the NAACP and a black lawyers’ association also asked the high court to intervene, saying that the conventions are needed to insure that minority candidates get elected.

The case is New York Board of Election v. Torres, 06-766.


Update
High court seems wary of tossing N.Y. judicial-selection system
During oral arguments, justices say state's method of letting political bosses essentially pick trial judges doesn't appear to violate Constitution. 10.04.07

Previous
N.Y. judicial-selection process rapped by 2nd Circuit
Unanimous panel says 2004 challenge is likely to succeed because method for picking state trial judges violates First Amendment rights of candidates, voters. 08.31.06

Related

High court to revisit primary-election politics

By Tony Mauro Justices must weigh association rights of political parties against rights of voters, candidates to have access to political system. 02.27.07

Court opens term with First Amendment case
2007-08 Supreme Court term preview by Tony Mauro Justices to decide three election- or voting-related cases, consider appeal from government on Internet law. 10.01.07

2006-07 Supreme Court case tracker

News summary page
View the latest news stories throughout the First Amendment Center Online.

print this   Print


Last system update: Thursday, August 21, 2008 | 13:35:52
 SEARCH  MORE
About this site
About the First Amendment
About the First Amendment Center
Video/RSS/podcasts
First Amendment programs
State of the First Amendment
reports

First Reports
Supreme Court
Experts
Columnists
First Amendment publications
First Amendment Center history
Glossary
Freedom Sings™
Events
First Amendment
Schools

Congressional Research Service reports
Guest editorials
FOI material
The First Amendment
Library

Lesson plans
freedomforum.org
Newseum
Contact us
Privacy statement
Related links