New Jersey Governor Chris Christie today informed Associate Justice John E. Wallace of the New Jersey Supreme Court, whose seven-year term ends on May 20, that he would not receive lifetime tenure on the Court. Christie nominated noted Mendham attorney Anne M. Patterson, a former Special Assistant Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General, to replace Wallace.
Wallace, 68, would not have been allowed to serve on the Court past his 70th birthday, which falls in March of 2012, in any case. Christie told Wallace in person that he would not be returning to the court, according to Senator Raymond Lesniak (D-Elizabeth). Claire Henninger and Lisa Fleisher of The Star-Ledger (Newark) quoted unnamed "people" as saying that Wallace' interview with Christie, one of several that Christie held with Wallace and a number of other Supreme Court candidates, "did not go well."
Patterson, 51, is a partner in the Morristown-based Riker Danzig law firm, specializing in product-liability defense. Her profile at Riker Danzig lists her as a winner of several awards and commendations by her peers and by associations of business clients. These awards include the Professional Lawyer of the Year Award in 2007, given by the New Jersey Commission on Professionalism in the Law, and the designation of "Super Lawyer" in the magazine Law and Politics.
Of Patterson, Christie said:
In Anne Patterson, I believe we have a future associate justice who understands at a principled level what it means to be a member of a co-equal branch of government, with its powers and its limitations. I also see in her the high level of legal intellect, character and compassion that I will require of any nomination I have the privilege to make to our highest court.
In saying why he replaced Wallace, Christie said:
Before and since becoming Governor, I was unambiguous in my intention to bring balance and change to the Supreme Court. My selection today is not a commentary on Justice Wallace. It is a fulfillment of my promise to turn the Court away from its history of using legal precedent to set social and tax policies in our state – a role which belongs squarely with the Legislative and Executive branches of state government.
With regard to that last, Christie further said:
The court over the course of the last three decades has gotten out of control. It inappropriately invaded the executive and legislative constitutional functions. It’s not for the court to set some of the policies that I believe that they’ve set. And I’ve talked all during the campaign about changing the court. The only way to change the court is to change its members.
Christie might in fact be talking about the Abbott and Mount Laurel series of decisions that are arguably the worst examples of the Court trying to act as governor and legislature. Wallace has voted consistently with Court majorities in Abbott v. Burke X-XX.
Christie's decision will likely surprise Columnnist Paul Mushine, who only yesterday described the governor as "tied up in knots" over the decision. One commenter on that article suggested that Mulshine now owed Christie an apology for predicting that Christie would reappoint Wallace out of a failure of political nerve. Another person who might be surprised is Christie's former primary rival, Steve Lonegan.
Lesniak, for his part, reacted in outrage, pointing out that no Justice of the Supreme Court has ever before failed of tenure (though some have resigned from the Court rather than force the issue with previous governors), and calling Christie's move a "dangerous precedent." Senator Kevin O'Toole (R-Essex) agreed that Christie had broken tradition, but commended Christie for his courage.
RoseAnn Salanitri, spokeswoman for the Committee to Recall Robert Menendez from the Office of United States Senator, hailed Christie's decision:
Christie has kept a promise he made to the people of New Jersey to reshape the Supreme Court and restore a proper respect for the separation of powers.
Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ) has an appeal now pending before the Court, scheduled for oral argument on May 25, to which Salanitri's committee is listed as respondent. At issue is whether New Jersey may, under its Uniform Recall Election Law, recall one of its two Senators.
This article is part of the New Jersey Supreme Court series.
Like this article? Want to be notified of more? Click Subscribe, above.
Seed Newsvine
Comments
A 68 year old is having his 70th birthday in 10 months?
Gov. Christie should be commended for initiating a break up of an out of control court that stepped way beyond it's constitutional role. Good decision to get rid of Wallace.
For the most part he is making the right moves to put NJ back on it's feet after 8 years of destruction and undermining the foundation of our economy.
Good Article
In July, Christie endorsed President Obama's nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court, saying "Elections have consequences. One of those consequences are judicial appointments. While Judge Sotomayor would not have been my choice, President Obama has used his opportunity to fill a seat on the Supreme Court by choosing a nominee who has more than proven her capability, competence and ability."
@Emerson:
That ought to have been March of 2012.
Excellent report - I also read your comment on one of Montreal Mental Health Examiner's articles about your wife's death. Eloquently put - sorry it happened.
Great news report.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!