Multiple Republicans have pointed out to Capital Tonight that this week’s redistricting ruling by the New York Court of Appeals comes after significant changes to the court they say were choreographed by the Legislature, which is held by Democrats. 

They have also questioned the decision by new Associate Judge Caitlin Halligan (whose nomination, Republicans argue, was not constitutional) to recuse herself, as well as why new Chief Judge Rowan Wilson chose Manhattan appellate Presiding Justice Dianne Renwick to take Halligan’s place on the case. 

“The problem here, is the way this court got put together,” New York State Republican Chairman Ed Cox stated. “The way the Senate, in an unprecedented way, refused the nomination of the governor. And then, when Judge Halligan recused herself, (Chief Judge Wilson) rather than just going ahead with six judges, insisted on changing the precedent and putting in a judge of his choice who in fact had already ruled on this issue in the Nichols case."

Republicans aren’t alone in crying foul. The Newsday editorial board wrote this week, “Incalculable damage has been done to the New York Court of Appeals as it can be justifiably regarded now as a partisan institution that delivers preordained outcomes.”

Vin Bonventre, the Justice Robert H. Jackson distinguished professor of law at Albany Law School and the author of the New York Court Watcher blog, said it’s true that the new composition of the court had something to do with the result in the case.

But Bonventre told Capital Tonight that the merits of the case shouldn’t be discounted. 

“The fact of the matter is, this current case that just came down this week, the issues were different. The issue was not whether the Democratic redistricting (in 2022)…was partisan gerrymandering,” Bonventre said. “The issue in this case was whether or not the remedy from the previous case was supposed to be a permanent remedy for the full 10 years, or just a temporary emergency remedy.” 

While Bonventre hasn’t been a fan of the Court of Appeals for several years, he sees an improvement under Wilson. 

“The reputation of the court hasn’t really been that strong for the last several years; let’s just be honest about it,” he said. “It was one thing when it was Judith Kaye at the top, when it was Jonathan Lippman at the top. Those years when Janet DiFiore was the chief judge, whether it was her fault or not, the court’s reputation really plummeted.”

He continued, “I happen to think the court’s reputation is going to skyrocket under Chief Judge Wilson.” 

Bonventre argues Wilson is a brilliant jurist who has already increased the court’s case load which had fallen to about 80 cases a year.

“Some of the judges were saying to me, ‘I have nothing to do.'"