Queens District Attorney Melinda Katz recently took to the pages of this publication to opine on the selection process for the next Chief Judge of the New York State Court of Appeals. Her argument was both circuitous and took veiled aim at a basic constitutional principle: the advice and consent of the Senate over appointments to the Court of Appeals.
The arguments in Katz’s piece are inherently contradictory. She writes that “the court’s decision making process surely benefits when its judges have a wide range of legal experiences,” and that the judges’ ability to “fully appreciate the legal and practical implications of their rulings” are enhanced, not diminished, by having judges with a variety of backgrounds.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
