Supreme Judicial Court nominee Judge Gabrielle Wolohojian largely escaped questions throughout a affirmation listening to Wednesday about her previous romantic relationship with Gov. Maura Healey and the potential affect it may have on her potential to listen to future instances earlier than the highest court docket.
Wolohojian now seems to be on a glide path to take a seat on Massachusetts’ highest court docket after members of the Governor’s Council raved about her 16 years on the Appeals Court and largely provided their assist for her nomination.
Even after some councilors broadcast earlier this month that they needed to ask Wolohojian about her ties to Healey and whether or not that will lead her to recuse herself from instances earlier than the excessive court docket involving the governor or her workplace, just one query was provided on the subject in the course of the listening to.
Instead, colleagues, pals, household, legal professionals, and judges confirmed as much as the State House to cheer Wolohojian, who was described by many as a extremely certified decide who can hit the bottom operating if permitted to the very best court docket within the state.
Councilor Eileen Duff stated she was “so excited” that Wolohojian utilized for the open Supreme Judicial Court spot vacated by former Justice David Lowy, who retired earlier this month for a job on the University of Massachusetts.
“I know it’s been controversial in some circles, but ‘A’ player’s hire ‘A’ players, and that’s what I think we’re doing right now,” Duff stated. “We do in Massachusetts have the best court system in the United States and we want to have the best and brightest.”
Of the seven members on the Governor’s Council, Councilors Marilyn Devaney, Christopher Iannella, Terrence Kennedy, Joseph Ferreira, and Duff both provided their reward or explicitly backed Wolohojian forward of a vote that would come as early as subsequent week.
Healey’s nomination of Wolohojian turned heads at the beginning of February as a result of the 2 had been collectively for greater than 10 years, even briefly dwelling collectively, earlier than separating in 2019.
During her time on the Appeals Court, Wolohojian recused herself from instances involving the part of the Attorney General’s Office the place Healey labored as assistant lawyer basic. The decide additionally took a go on “all cases” that concerned the Attorney General’s Office when Healey was later elected lawyer basic, a court docket spokesperson stated.
“Justice Wolohojian resumed hearing cases handled by the Attorney General’s office after the election of Attorney General (Andrea) Campbell,” the spokesperson, Jennifer Donahue, stated in an announcement.
Healey beforehand stated Wolohojian wouldn’t need to recuse herself from instances involving the governor’s workplace. Wolohojian declined to reply reporters’ questions after the listening to Wednesday, together with on her previous relationship with the governor.
“I am very proud to be here with my mother today,” Wolohojian stated when pressed by reporters.
Devaney questioned Wolohijan on whether or not there “is any matter that would come up” that would warrant recusal. Wolohojian stated recusal “is something that I take very seriously” and needs to be executed on a case-by-case foundation.
“I want to add here that I think for those of us who are judges, and lawyers, we understand that there’s a danger in over-recusal as well as a danger in under-recusal,” she stated. “You’re trying to get recusal right. And that you can only do by looking at each case individually. I have absolutely no interest, and never have, in sitting on cases I shouldn’t sit on, or not sitting in cases I should sit on.”
Healey addressed the previous relationship head-on on the outset of the assembly, telling a packed auditorium it “should not deprive the people of Massachusetts of an outstanding SJC justice.”
Healey, who rapidly left the listening to with out taking questions from the council, stated there isn’t a particular person extra able to hit the bottom operating on day one of many job than Wolohojian and “there are no ethical issues” with the nomination.
“As we’ve heard today, and as I have consistently heard from advisors I trust and as I know from experience, Judge Wolohojian is a remarkable jurist, uniquely talented, thoroughly prepared, generously willing to serve, and deeply committed to our judicial institutions,” Healey stated. “And I know that personally.”
Councilor Tara Jacobs tried to handle the “optics” of the nomination, telling Wolohojian that she researched legal guidelines round nepotism, talked to professors who’re consultants on ethics, and skim numerous authorized codes of conduct.
“There’s optics here and it’s troubled me, and it’s been reflected from others. And having said that, I have truly struggled with it,” Jacobs stated. “The optics matter to me because there’s the perception of our courts having integrity, having trust in our courts.”
Wolohojian stated the nominating course of she took half in underneath Healey was no completely different than when she utilized for an open Supreme Judicial Court spot underneath former Gov. Charlie Baker, with whom she interviewed for the put up.
Wolohojian, who acquired the advice of a nominating fee put collectively by Baker, didn’t in the end earn the job. A bunch of 5 folks, together with Healey’s chief of workers and chief authorized counsel, really useful Wolohojian to the first-term Democrat.
“Sitting from my chair, I have done everything like every other candidate and I don’t know what else I can do, other than do the process that’s been really in place since the Dukakis administration,” Wolohojian stated in response to Jacobs.
Source: www.bostonherald.com”