Judging, Lest They Be Judges

Wednesday February 13, 2008

It’s about 1 p.m. and elements of the Judiciary Committee, very few of them at that, are continuing to drone along with questions for judicial nominees that have ranged from merely fawning to self-serving.
Sen. John Kissel, R-Enfield, ranking member of the committee, fairly stumbled over himself, asking state Supreme Court Justice Barry R. Schaller what it’s REALLY like behind the scenes on the high bench. He showed restraint by not asking for an autograph, I guess.
“I’m still learning, absolutely, every day,” Schaller said. “Going from the trial court to the Appellate Court is much more of a change. That was a much bigger cultural shift. This was more of a subtle shift.”
The inside story? The Supremes meet together right after a session’s hearings and discuss them and then it becomes clear which justice is on what side.
When it came to the nomination of Richard A. Robinson, who had an interim appointment on the Appellate Court, the issue of race came up. Robinson, an African-American, spoke out against quotas for minority judges.
“Every job I’ve gotten is because I was the best candidate for the job,” said Robinson, a Stratford resident. He suggested that if Connecticut wants to expand its minority-candidate pool, it should advertise among historic minority colleges. “Once they come to apply for the job, they can compete with anyone there,” he said. “I don’t think it can be fixed with quotas.”
. Superior Court Judge Carmen Espinosa of Southington was asked by Sen. Andrew McDonald, D-Stamford, co-chairman of the Judiciary Committee, her definition of a “high-powered lawyer.”
She thought for a couple seconds, then smiled. “That’s someone who thinks they know more than what they do know,” she replied.