Jeffrey Dinowitz Jeffrey Dinowitz.

The chairman of the state Assembly judiciary committee is criticizing the New York state court system for effectively forcing dozens of older judges off the bench to help deal with an approximate $300 million cut to the judiciary budget.

Assemblyman Jeffrey Dinowitz, D-Bronx, has panned the move and called it a clear form age discrimination. The decision, he wrote, will "exacerbate the crisis facing our court system."

Dinowitz made the comments in a letter Oct. 2 to Chief Administrative Judge Lawrence Marks, who last week reported that cutting the older judges would save the court system upward of $55 million over the next two years.

"I realize that you are faced with a horrible situation, but decimating our courts is not the answer," Dinowitz wrote in the letter to Marks, adding that he is "very troubled" by the decision.

The decision is sparking concerns about further delays in cases and New York court employee unions say they are deeply troubled by the prospect of layoffs.

In a memorandum last week, Marks reported that Gov. Andrew Cuomo is slashing the current judiciary budget by 10% as the economic fallout of the coronavirus pandemic takes its toll on the state budget. Marks wrote that the cut has forced the court system to implement "painful measures," including a hiring freeze and the deferral of "substantial payments owed to the next fiscal year."

The chief administrative judge indicated that layoffs could be on the table.

Chief Judge Janet DiFiore, in a video statement released Monday, weighed in on the system's decision to force out older judges. She characterized it as something that was difficult but needed.

"While not pleased with where we are, we are hopeful that the elimination of this year's certification program, along with the other cost-saving measures we have put in place—a strict hiring freeze, deferral of raises, suspension of our JHO program and other hard choices—will put us in a position to achieve enough cost savings to avoid or at least greatly limit layoffs in our non-judicial workforce, something we regard as an absolute last resort," she said in the video.

She acknowledged the move has been made "on top of an already stretched and limited judicial capacity."

The state court system is losing a cohort of experienced public servants, she said.

"On a personal level, it is disappointing to see the judicial careers of friends and colleagues end in this fashion," she said.

Lucian Chalfen, a state court spokesman, reported last week that the court system did not approve the certification or recertification of 46 judges.

He said certification relates to when an elected state Supreme Court judge reaches 70 years old but wishes to stay on the bench. The judge is allowed to apply to continue serving for a two-year term, he said. After that period, he said they can apply for two more two-year terms.

The court system has released a list of the older judges who will be lost to the cost-cutting measure. The list shows that the majority of the 46 judges who were not granted certification are from courts in downstate counties.

Read the list here:

The certification of judges who have reached 70 years old is not required or guaranteed, Dinowitz wrote in the letter. But, he argued the decision is a form of age discrimination and will "significantly impact the already huge backlog facing many of the courts due to COVID-19."

"I cannot think of anything worse for the poorest large county where we face tremendous problems already," the Democrat wrote. "The courts in every other county will be similarly impacted."

Dinowitz added that he hopes there will be moves soon to deal with the budget hole, pointing to either large federal aid or raising taxes "on the wealthiest among us."

In a statement, Dinowitz warned that the court system decision will lead to delayed justice for thousands of state residents.

"New Yorkers deserve better, and I urge the Office of Court Administration to figure out a different way to manage the fiscal crisis our state is in," he said in the statement.

In a letter to the lawmaker, Marks wrote that the state court system is forced to take steps, like the certification decision, to avoid laying off non-judicial workers this fiscal year.

"Indefinitely deferring that decision, as you imply, pending highly uncertain events such as tax increases or federal bail-out funding—with no guarantee that the Judiciary would even benefit from such potential developments—would be inconsistent with sound management of the court system's budget," Marks wrote.

READ MORE: