A discussion came up at lunch the other day about the election of NYS Supreme Court Justices. The concern was that if certain federal issues fall to the state (e.g. abortion or gay marriage), as advocated by some of the Presidential candidates, that in New York the decision would then fall to the NYS Supreme Court to decide. The thinking was that this possibility sh0uld be a factor in deciding which judicial candidates to vote for.

This didn’t sound quite right to me, but I wasn’t as certain of the NYS court structure as I would have preferred, so I didn’t object at that point. But now I’ve done some homework, and I do think that basing NYS Supreme Court Judge selection based on their opportunity to opine on key social issues is not reasonable.

The understandable confusion comes from the use of the term “Supreme Court.” There’s a reasonable supposition that NYS Supreme Court would act and work like the Federal Supreme Court with which we are most familiar. But that’s not the case. In NY, the Supreme Court is primarily a trial court of general jurisdiction, which exists in each county. It handles felony cases, large civil disputes, and (for some reason) all matrimonial actions. If you’re not happy with NYS Supreme Court rulings they may be appealed to the court’s Appellate Division, and from there to the NYS Court of Appeals. Court of Appeals judges are appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the State Senate, more similar to Federal Supreme Court appointments by the President.

All this ironically means that the so-called Supreme Court is not so very supreme. It also means that if you’re concerned about who are the top judges in NYS, you should be careful of who you vote in as Governor and State Senator.