NY Post Editorial Rips Lippman's "Sweet Racket"

The chief judge's sweet racket

The New York Post - EDITORIAL - December 7, 2009

It doesn't say much for the judicial system when New York's top judge shows scant respect for the state Constitution -- to say nothing of the rule of law. During confirmation hearings earlier this year, Court of Appeals Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman said "judicial pay raises" were his "biggest issue." Or, rather, the lack of them: State lawmakers, too frightened to hike their own pay, refuse to pony up for judges, either. Lippman's mentor and immediate predecessor, Judith Kaye, actually sued to win judicial raises. This stood to compromise the integrity of those judges who'd be called on to rule on raises for themselves and their colleagues -- but creating conflict of interest is what they do best in Albany. Now Lippman has topped Kaye. As The Post's James Fanelli reported Sunday, last month he doubled, by diktat, state judges' annual expense allowances, from $5,000 to $10,000 -- an unauthorized de facto pay hike. Most judges just take the expense allowance, declare it as income and spend it as they see fit. Others use the accounts as slush funds to expense iPods, "meditation retreats," air purifiers and other nonessentials. Some even have their portraits done -- no surprise, given how seriously some New York judges take themselves. Lippman's key claim to fame before ascending to the top court was a lifelong friendship with Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, one of Albany's most accomplished corner-cutters. Seems he picked up a few tricks from the ol' master. Judges get irked when shown contempt by the people. But what about when judges show contempt for the people?