US-LAW-Legislature Advances Proposal to Extend Retirement Age for State Judges

The following information is used for educational purposes only.




Legislature Advances Proposal to Extend Retirement Age for State Judges


Joel Stashenko

New York Law Journal

2013-06-22


ALBANY - A measure to increase the mandatory retirement age for some state judges to 80 from 70 will be on the statewide ballot this November.

The state Senate completed second passage of the amendment (A4395/S886) by a vote of 54-7 early Saturday morning. It would increase the retirement age of Court of Appeals judges, while providing that no judge could be appointed after he or she has reached the age of 70.

It also would increase to 80 from 76 the maximum age Supreme Court justices could continue to serve after they have been certificated by court administrators. The measure was one of the last bills passed by the Senate before it concluded its regular 2013 session at about 6:40 a.m.

The Senate did not vote on a second proposed amendment that would have increased the retirement age of more judges.

"I am exeremtely euphoric that the judiciary has reached yet another milestone, bringing them into the modern world, by second passage of this constitutional amendment raising the age of retirement for wise, competent, hard-working jurists," the state's chief administrative judge, A. Gail Prudenti, said Saturday morning.

The retirement age was set at the 70 in 1869, and the Office of Court Administration called for its modification in a 1999 task force report.

The proposal is now in the hands of the voters. Governor Andrew Cuomo does not have to sign off.

The amendment to Article VI, §25 of the state Constitution had passed both chambers of the Legislature in 2011 and again in the state Assembly by a 117-25 vote on Feb. 28, 2013.

The amendment was sponsored by state Sen. John Bonacic, a Mount Hope Republican who chairs the Senate's Judiciary Committee.

Bonacic threw something of a curve at the state Office of Court Administration, which set adoption of the mandatory retirement amendment as its top 2013 legislative priority, by beginning to promote a different proposed amendment (A7969/S4934) in the waning weeks of the 2013 legislative session.

That measure would raise the retirement age for all state judges to 74 from 70, including those on the Court of Claims, acting Supreme Court justices, Family Court judges and county court judges. It would authorize Court of Appeals and Supreme Court judges to remain on the bench until they are 80 if they are certificated (NYLJ, May 7).

Bonacic said he thought the second amendment was fairer, in a way, because it would include all state judges excluded from the proposed amendment that has been in the legislative pipeline since 2011.

Several associations representing judges other than elected Supreme Court justices endorsed the broader retirement amendment.

Because A7969/S4934 was facing initial passage this year, the earliest it could be placed on a statewide ballot was November 2015.

The OCA, which had pushed the amendment for the more inclusive mandatory retirement amendment in 2010 and 2011, found itself in the position of publicly advocating for both measures, though it promoted the measure adopted by the Senate Saturday far more vigorously in its lobbying efforts.

The more inclusive amendment was not passed by either chamber in the waning days of the 2013 legislative session.

The chairwoman of the Assembly's Judiciary Committee, Brooklyn Democrat Helene Weinstein, sponsored both constitutional amendments in her house.

@|Joel Stashenko can be contacted at jstashenko@alm.com.



Source: www.newyorklawjournal.com