Judicial selection

Gov. David A. Paterson has injected identity politics into the selection of the next chief judge of the state Court of Appeals. The governor is "outraged" that no women were on the list of seven persons recommended to succeed Chief Judge Judith S. Kaye when she retires at the end of the year.

Gov. Paterson took exception to the choices presented by the Commission on Judicial Nomination. It was established by a 1977 constitutional amendment to select nominees for the state's highest court based on merit. It is restricted to seven candidates from whom the governor must choose his nominee for approval by the Senate.

The commission's list includes four state appeals court judges and three private practicing lawyers whom it deemed "well qualified." Not good enough for Mr. Paterson and others, including state Attorney General Andrew Cuomo.

Mr. Cuomo said that "something is wrong with either the process or the legislation or the way it was administered," as he pledged to explore legal options.

Once the matter of gender was introduced, it opened the door to ethnicity in judicial selection. State Sen. Ruth Hassell-Thompson, ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, along with Assemblyman Peter Rivera, pointed to the absence of Hispanics on the list.

Mr. Rivera said at least two and possibly four women applied for the panel's consideration.

Gov. Paterson, who has to nominate someone from the list by Jan. 15, said he would not ask the commission to reopen the selection process. He was careful not to cast doubt on the qualifications or merit of the men on the list, but the focus on gender and ethnicity introduces politics over merit in the selection.

Rather than challenge the quality of the nominees, critics have questioned the commission's process, its secrecy, the adequacy of its outreach to produce a wider pool of candidates, and the constitutional limit of seven nominees.

Despite the criticism, Albany Law School Professor Vincent Bonventre told the Associated Press that this year's "outstanding" list of nominees was the strongest he had seen in the 30-year history of the commission.

There have been calls for greater transparency in the selection process, but it is important to preserve the independence of the panel from interference and ensure New Yorkers they are getting the best judges based on their judicial qualifications and legal capabilities.