Christie's Supreme Court Nominees Set to Face Senate Committee

Tuesday, March 20, 2012

New Jersey Democrats say they will rigorously question Governor Chris Christie's two nominees to the state supreme court on Thursday.

If confirmed, Bruce Harris, 61, would become the first openly gay justice. He is the mayor of Chatham, a finance lawyer and a registered Republican.

While Phillip Kwon, 44, would become the first Asian-American on the state’s highest court. He was a registered Republican in New York before moving to New Jersey last year. He also worked under Christie at the federal prosecutor’s office in Newark. 

The Senate Judiciary Committee will hear testimony on the nominees on Thursday before it is expected to vote that same day on whether to forward the nominations onto the full senate.

Traditionally, New Jersey governors have strived to maintain a political balance on the court. On Tuesday, a large number of groups in New Jersey held a press conference to announce their opposition to the nominees. They argue that Christie is trying to remake the court to overturn mandated funding to low-income school districts and affordable housing requirements.

“It's never been true that a governor has appointed people to the court just solely based on their position on one or two issues,” said Dena Mottola Jaborska of New Jersey Citizen Action.

The leading Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Gerald Cardinale (R-Bergen) said he supports both Kwon and Harris. The nominees will be fair justices who will follow the law, rather than make it, he said.  He did acknowledge that New Jersey governors have abided by an unwritten rule to maintain balance on the court, but he’s not concerned that these nominees might tilt that balance.

“No, I would hope that it tilts the court in terms of responsibility to the law,” Cardinale said. 

Christie nominated Harris and Kwon in January.


Comments [1]

B. McElhone from NYC

Your report, this morning, on the current nominees to the NJ supreme court ignores the long history of ideological bias on the court. The Winter 2012 edition of City Journal reviews the court's history and demonstrates conclusively the inaccuracy of your claim that it is -- or has been at any time in your life -- politically balanced.

While there is always room for disagreement on particular decisions, the aggregate of the court's decisions contradicts the spirit of your report. Are you really unaware of this, or was the truth snagged in WNYC's ideological filter?

Mar. 22 2012 08:58 AM

Leave a Comment

Email addresses are required but never displayed.

Get the WNYC Morning Brief in your inbox.
We'll send you our top 5 stories every day, plus breaking news and weather.