by Adrienne Lu
Inquirer Trenton Bureau
Conservatives have long blamed the New Jersey Supreme Court for making a mess of some of the state's most vexing issues, from affordable housing to public school funding.
Now those same conservatives are calling for Gov. Christie, a Republican, to start overhauling the court by replacing Justice John E. Wallace Jr. instead of renominating him when his first term ends May 20.
By all accounts, Christie appears to be seriously considering the move, which would upend decades of tradition: Under the state constitution, which dates to 1947, no Supreme Court justice has ever failed to be reappointed for tenure.
Christie will have the opportunity to replace at least four of the seven justices in his first term. Those decisions could have more of an impact on the state than anything else he does as governor.
"In the next three years, Christie can really reshape the nature of the Supreme Court," said Joseph Marbach, a political analyst at Seton Hall University.
Wallace, a Gloucester County Democrat, is also the court's only African-American justice, so if Christie does not renominate him, the governor could feel pressure to replace him with another African American. Wallace, who was appointed by Democratic Gov. Jim McGreevey in 2003, declined to comment.
Even if reappointed, Wallace will face mandatory retirement in two years when he turns 7o, which means Christie will get to choose his replacement anyway.
But conservatives are clamoring for Christie to seize the moment.
"He needs to send a message to the court now that he is going to restructure the majority to be a majority that believes in judicial restraint as opposed to activism," said former Assemblyman Richard Merkt, a Republican from Morris County. "Reappointing Wallace would send the message he was happy with the status quo ... He cannot afford that mistake."
Senator Gerald Cardinale (R-Bergen), who sits on the Judiciary Committee, called Wallace a nice person and said he held no grudges against him.
But he said Wallace also was part of the liberal wing of the court, which Cardinale said "ran wild and decided to rewrite the Constitution, not to interpret the Constitution."
If Christie wants to reappoint Wallace, he will need to move quickly for the required approval by the Senate Judiciary Committee and full Senate before May 20. Under the Constitution, the governor must give the Senate seven days' public notice of nominations to the Supreme Court.
Christie has not said what he will do on the reappointment.
"It's premature for us to discuss the renomination at this time," said his spokesman Michael Drewniak. "Those are the kinds of things we'll speak to probably not until we actually say yea or nay."
On the campaign trail last year, Christie did not mince words when asked what he would look for in a state justice.
"I want someone who is extraordinarily bright, and I want someone who will interpret laws and the Constitution, not legislate from the bench," Christie told the Star-Ledger of Newark.
More recently, he told the Asbury Park Press that he "did not subscribe to the theory that people once appointed must be reappointed."
"I know that's the way it's been in the state, but I don't think we set up the constitution with a method where the executive has to reappoint after seven years before tenure attaches just for fun. I think we did it because they want you to make an evaluation and a judgment."
Christie's views appear to align with Wallace's on the appropriate role of a judge. When asked during the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on his appointment to the Supreme Court about his views on the death penalty, Wallace said he had no philosophy on the issue.
"I'm prepared to follow the law as the law has been upheld in the past ... When I get involved with a court decision, I put aside my personal belief and apply the law," Wallace said.
No comments:
Post a Comment