Markets 
ALBANY – New York Chief Judge Rowan Wilson was forced to admit he shouldn’t have called on voters to oust jurists who believe in “stupid” long sentences.
Wilson faced a complaint filed by a group of Republican state lawmakers, who said he crossed a line when he told attendees at a CUNY Law School forum earlier this year that voting out hard-nosed judges was “something you can do for me.”
“I wish I had been clearer,” Wilson wrote to the state Commission on Judicial Conduct, according to its letter ultimately dismissing the complaint.
He said the remarks were a reaction to hearing about an unnamed judge calling a defendant an “animal” who “should be “locked up” for the rest of his life before sentencing him.
Wilson — who once penned a widely-panned legal opinion arguing that an elephant at the Bronx Zoo had the same rights as humans — said he lost control amid “extreme disgust of the comparison of human beings to caged animals.”
“I should have said that the voters have that ability and should become informed and express their preferences through the electoral process,” Wilson wrote.
Judges must stick to strict rules governing their political statements, one of the basses for the GOP pols’ complaint, which was filed in March.
The judicial conduct commission did not take issue with Wilson’s other remarks at the same forum calling on Albany lawmakers to pass the Second Look Act, which would allow felons to request another sentencing hearing after 10 years.
“It is permissible for a Chief Judge, as leader of the Unified Court System, not only to advocate for but also to propose legislation concerning the law, the legal system and the administration of justice,” the CJC wrote.
A spokesperson for Wilson, who has served as chief judge of the New York Court of Appeals since 2022, did not respond to a request for comment Wednesday.
State Sen. Anthony Palumbo (R-Suffolk), a former prosecutor and ranking member of his chamber’s judiciary committee, said he was “glad” that Wilson was forced to address his comments, even if the CJC ultimately did not penalize him.
“I’m glad to see that Judge Wilson’s conduct was addressed, and that he will choose his words more carefully in the future. It’s unfortunate that those comments were made in the first place,” Palumbo said.
“The Chief Judge’s comments were wholly inappropriate, seeking to galvanize opposition against judges with whom he does not agree,” Assemblyman Michael Tannousis (R-Staten Island) wrote in a statement.
“Although I appreciate the Commission’s investigation into the matter, I question whether a deferential standard was applied here that would not have been applied to judges with an alternative point of view,” he said.
Prior to being elevated to the chief judge post, Wilson wrote a dissenting opinion in favor of Happy the elephant, via an animal rights group, being allowed to petition for her freedom from the Bronx Zoo through habeas corpus – a legal principle used for challenging wrongful imprisonment.
“We should recognize Happy’s right to petition for her liberty not just because she is a wild animal who is not meant to be caged and displayed, but because the rights we confer on others define who we are as a society,” he wrote at the time.
As chief judge, Wilson has presided over consequential matters, like overturning Hollywood sexual predator Harvey Weinstein’s first sex-crimes conviction in Manhattan court.
Read the full article here
