Retired N.J. Supreme Court justices ask Gov. Chris Christie to reconsider reappointing Justice Wallace

'Reappointment would be denied only when a judge was deemed unfit, a standard that ensured the independence of the State's judiciary under the Constitution,' justices wrote

Robert Sciarrino/The Star-LedgerNew Jersey Supreme Court Justice John Wallace Jr.
TRENTON — Presenting their own strict interpretation of the state Constitution, eight retired Supreme Court justices jumped into the political fray today over Gov. Chris Christie’s decision to replace a sitting justice.

In a three-page statement, the eight asked the governor to reconsider removing Justice John Wallace from the court when his term expires Thursday.

"There is simply no question about the intent of the framers of our Constitution: reappointment would be denied only when a judge was deemed unfit, a standard that ensured the independence of the State’s judiciary under the Constitution," the justices wrote.

Christie, who has praised Wallace’s intellect and integrity, said today the justice is out and that’s final.

Earlier this month, he introduced Anne Patterson, a Republican and respected attorney who lives in Mendham Township, at a press conference as Democrat Wallace’s replacement.

Without citing specific cases, the Republican governor has said he disagrees with the direction the state’s highest court has taken and wants to remake it into a body that more strictly interprets the state Constitution.

Today, he pointed out that the Constitution gives him the right to appoint justices. He will have the opportunity to name four to the court because three will be up for reappointment and one will reach mandatory retirement age of 70 during his term. Nominees need Senate confirmation.

Conservatives have long criticized the court for decisions on school funding and affordable housing that influenced decades of public policy. Wallace was not on the court when those landmark rulings were made. While on the court, he endorsed civil unions over gay marriage.

In their statement, the eight justices — Robert Clifford, James Coleman Jr., Marie Garibaldi, Alan Handler, Stewart Pollock, Deborah Poritz, Gary Stein and James Zazzali — said the governor is breaking more than six decades of tradition in state government.

The four Democrats and four Republicans said the framers of the state’s 1947 Constitution meant for justices to be given lifetime tenure after a proving themselves during an initial seven-year term.

"No governor before now has sought to control the Third Branch of government through the reappointment process," they wrote. The justices also said governors have maintained a "four/three party affiliation split" on the court to avoid court "packing" and to protect its independence.

Christie countered that politics has always been a part of judicial nominations, and it’s "just laughable" for critics to argue that suddenly "politics is coming into play for the first time in the pristine 60-plus year history of the ... Supreme Court."

Had he been reappointed, Wallace, 68, of Sewell, could only have served 22 months before reaching mandatory retirement.

The justices’ statement is the latest in a series of unusual actions regarding Wallace, beginning with the governor’s decision to replace him. That was followed by a rare public statement from Chief Justice Stuart Rabner stating his disappointment in the decision and his support for Wallace. Then, Senate President Stephen Sweeney (D-Gloucester) vowed that Patterson’s nomination would not come before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

In the absence of a seventh justice on the court, Rabner can appoint a retired Supreme Court justice or use the most senior appellate division judge to fill in temporarily.

Staff writer Claire Heininger contributed to this report.