Key Nominee to N.Y. Court of Appeals

The "Supreme Court" of New York is the lowest court of the state system and is the Manhattan [New York County] district court basically. The highest court of New York is the "court of appeals" and has seven judges with fourteen-year terms. It is currently generally said to be split 4-3, but the conservative chief judge announced earlier this year that she would resign years early.   

Gov. Hochul, who nominated one of the "three" earlier (a black woman, she had some opposition since people didn't want yet another former prosecutor), would have her first major choice after being elected for a full term in her own right.  She had seven choices, with progressives stating varying comments like "acceptable," "no comment," and "hell no."  Roughly speaking.  She chose one from the last box

Judge Hector LaSalle is a lower court judge who would be the first Latino to lead the state court system.  Like the black woman pick, it looks like Hochul favors these "firsts" and message picks, more conservative there than (nod to President Biden) strongly liberal picks or non-prosecutors. Given her background as a moderate upstate sort, this is not really surprising.  Cuomo didn't pick her for progressive bona fides.

Cuomo's last two picks (from my vantage point, one more than the other) had strong progressive opposition, but in the end, only ten (including my own, who will not be there this time) senators voted against them.  We are getting some ire against Gov. Hochul.  But, if that sort of number is going to oppose her pick, people better not just go after her.

I retweeted my Bronx Borough President strongly supporting him with this take & later she deleted the tweet, for whatever reason.  Like the "Cuomo" redistricting fiasco takes, that is sort of bullshit.  This sort of thing -- the system in place provides checks and balances for a reason -- has multiple parents.  

There have been a few strong objections (if not from a key committee chair) from senators and media commentators (Kate Shaw, of Strict Scrutiny Podcast, who at times is a bit more professor-like than her two colleagues, tweeted a strong objection). It would be a good sign of progressive strength if someone who made such red-flag rulings on matters involving key issues like labor and abortion is blocked.  

A vote is due sometime in January.  I fear he will be confirmed, which would just be aggravating in what is supposedly the second most populous Democratic/liberal leaning state in the union.  Anyway, my incoming senator, the replacement to Biaggi, opposed the nomination, even though he himself is Hispanic.  

My bottom line is that I accept that the governor (not my first choice to be sure but seems acceptable overall) won't be as liberal as I will like in various cases.  But, this is a key pick with long-term significance.  There were multiple options to avoid doing something that comes off as a "fu" to progressives.  So why do this? She already is getting heat for keeping a key campaign guy who progressives deem a major reason Democrats did badly in 2022.  

The hope is that long term that he won't be quite as bad as some fear.  But, it's a reasonable bet that other options would be better. And, it would be better politically, since you are not saying "screw you" progressives. Net, why make such a choice?  Citing a "first" or even if deep down the pick matches the governor's overall views is not enough here.  It just seems like a bad move, which for some will be a HORRIBLE one.  Bad call.

===

Rep. Mondaire Jones, who among other things has been a strong critic of the Supreme Court at times, got caught in the whole redistricting mess.  The net result is the guy who pushed him aside lost to a Republican, but maybe Jones will get a chance to beat that guy (maybe both?) again in two years.  

Jones is Pelosi's choice for the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, which is a nice way to spend some of his time.  Good luck.  He is only in his mid-30s and should have a good future in public life.