The Record – editorial - Full court press ...  “...Christie started the political shenanigans in 2010... Democrats responded...with political posturing of their own... Fill the vacancies. Soon.”

Wednesday June 13, 2012, 7:00 am

GOVERNOR Christie wants to reshape the state Supreme Court. We just want it filled.

The high court's decision Monday to reject an appeal for a stay on the governor's elimination of the Council on Affordable Housing may have an immediate effect on the proposed state budget, but the decision underscores an even greater concern: There are only five sitting state Supreme Court justices who have been nominated by a governor and approved by the Senate. The seven-member court is missing two permanent justices because of petty politics.

Christie started the political shenanigans in 2010 when he chose not to renominate Justice John Wallace. It was a precedent-breaking decision. No governor had refused to renominate a sitting justice since the writing of the current state constitution, and Christie made clear he was denying Wallace tenure until age 70 solely on ideological grounds.

Democrats responded to Christie's political posturing with political posturing of their own. No justice would be considered until after Wallace's 70th birthday, the date on which he would have been required by law to retire. Yet a deal was eventually struck that put one new justice on the court after Justice Roberto Rivera-Soto chose not to seek reappointment.

In March, Wallace turned 70, as did Justice Virginia Long. Senate President Stephen Sweeney, D-Gloucester, issued an ultimatum to Christie that the next two nominees had to be minority candidates. Christie gave the Senate two minority nominees, and the Senate Judiciary Committee gave them directions to the exit; neither nominee was confirmed.

Enough. The state Supreme Court is supposed to have seven justices. The governor has the right to name candidates of his choosing, not the Senate's. If the candidates are qualified, they should be confirmed.

Christie should nominate two qualified justices, candidates who are worthy of the state's highest court. The Judiciary Committee, in turn, should review these people on their individual merits and nothing else. Let's call this sad game even — Christie didn't renominate Wallace and Democrats didn't confirm two Christie nominees. Move on.

There are issues coming to the high court that will shape the future of New Jersey — from affordable housing formulas to marriage equality. The people of New Jersey have a right to expect three equal branches of government. But one branch, the judiciary, is being held hostage by politics.

Fill the vacancies. Soon.