Republicans file misconduct complaint against Chief Judge Rowan Wilson

Last month, Chief Judge Rowan Wilson called the state’s current sentencing laws “stupid” and encouraged people to vote out judges they didn’t like. Now, Republicans in the state Legislature say the head of New York’s judiciary violated rules governing judicial conduct when he made those remarks. 

The Republican ranking members of both the state Senate and Assembly Judiciary Committees announced on Wednesday they are filing a formal complaint against Wilson with the Commission on Judicial Conduct, which investigates alleged misconduct by judges and offers disciplinary rulings that can range from a public censure to removal from the bench. “No lawyer, actually, who has a brain, necessarily would want to do something like this,” state Sen. Anthony Palumbo said of lodging a complaint against the state’s top judge. “But this is why this is so important.”

Wilson made the comments at the heart of the complaint while speaking at a town hall event for the Second Look Act, a bill that would make it easier for judges to revisit potentially excessive sentencing decisions. As City & State first reported, Wilson said “everything we are doing here is stupid” in reference to strict laws governing sentencing in place now.

Wilson also ambiguously weighed in on electoral politics, which judges are typically not permitted to do. He referenced a transcript in which an unnamed judge called a defendant an “animal” who should be “locked up” for the rest of their life. Wilson called the sentiment “distressing,” and said while he couldn’t do much about that judge’s presence on the bench, voters could. “When those judges come up to be elected, don't vote for them, and get other people not to vote for them,” he said. “That's something you could do for me and (Chief Administrative) Judge (Joseph) Zayas.” 

Republicans cited both remarks in the formal complaint they filed on Wednesday. “The most problematic part of that is the last sentence – judges have been removed from the bench for less. ‘For me.’” Palumbo said. “And this isn't coming from a town judge, a district court judge. This is coming from a man who is in charge of an entire branch of government.” Republicans’ action against the chief judge seems like it would be a first.

Palumbo and his counterpart Assembly Member Michael Tannousis charged that Wilson’s comments demonstrate improper involvement with politics and show he cannot be impartial. “Now we have a chief judge at a symposium actually telling the public not to vote for judges that he does not agree with,” Tannousis said, adding that such political and legislative advocacy doesn't belong in the judiciary. “If you want to be a legislator or an elected official, run for office,” Tannousis said. “Judges are not supposed to be involved in these types of issues.”

As chief judge, Wilson has not been shy about his support for a number of criminal justice reform measures, including the Second Look Act. He has made clear his desire to make changes to the courts in a bid to make them more fair and has consistently focused on the human toll on people who pass through the court system. Wilson even had current and former incarcerated individuals speak at one of his State of the Judiciary addresses. His nomination process was also unusually political; Senate Democrats rejected the governor’s more conservative first pick for chief judge, who had the support of Palumbo and other Republicans, and pushed instead for the more liberal Wilson.

But Al Baker, a spokesperson for the Office of Court Administration, said none of Wilson’s remarks at the Second Look event last month violated any ethics rules. “It is appropriate for the Chief Judge to express his views on pending legislation that affects the court system,” Baker said in a statement. “It is also appropriate for him to speak publicly about proper judicial temperament and values, and to encourage New Yorkers to stay informed about the conduct of the judges serving their communities and to participate in the processes by which those judges are elected or appointed.”

Once Republicans have filed the complaint, the Commission on Judicial Conduct will make a determination first on whether to pursue an investigation. The body may choose to dismiss the complaint after an initial review, or move forward with a formal probe. After an investigation, the commission can still dismiss the complaint if it determines the judge did not violate the rules, or make a public determination if the complaint is substantiated.

The outcome of an investigation could have major impacts on New York’s court system. A public censure alone would cause a stir, but a ruling to remove Wilson from the bench would leave the judiciary branch without a leader.

Neither Palumbo nor Tannousis speculated on what the commission would ultimately do, but held firm that Wilson’s conduct must be examined – especially because of his prominent position. “It just certainly warrants review, in our opinion, because … if nobody goes after the chief judge on this, I think the floodgates are open and we’re going to have politics completely infecting that area of our state that should be sacrosanct,” Palumbo said.