News

Re: Appellate Judicial Vacancies Chief Letter to Scarnati

February 10, 2008

Dear Senator Scarnati: Governor Edward G. Rendell has forwarded to the Pennsylvania Senate the names of four nominees to fill vacancies on the Supreme Court, the Superior Court, and the Commonwealth Court. I urge the Senate to prioritize the confirmation process in light of the need to fill these vacancies so that the orderly and timely disposition of the important matters that come before these Courts, and especially the matters that come before the Supreme Court, can continue with as little delay as possible. For your further information the next two oral argument sessions are scheduled for April 14 through April 18, 2008 and May 12 through May 16, 2008. Twenty-five matters are listed for the April Session and 25 matters are listed for the May Session. The same difficulties as described above may occur in the matters listed in those sessions. As a second point, it is crucial that individuals of experience be appointed to these two-year (and now less) vacancies. Prior judicial experience is, of course, the most relevant qualification needed to successfully address the important work of these Courts. At the appellate court level, it is a challenge to be able to handle the large caseload and the administrative requirements that are the daily work of our busy appellate courts. The learning curve as an appellate judge is steep and it is long. Accordingly, prior judicial experience can provide an individual with the background necessary to successfully complete judicial assignments. Both former Justice James Fitzgerald and Senior Judge James Colins possess this experience in abundance, each having served the court system in various judicial capacities for almost thirty years. Judge Robert Daniels has less judicial experience but has an abundance of trial experience as one of the top trial attorneys in the state. Notwithstanding, a review of his body of work produced thus far on the Superior Court demonstrates that he is an effective Judge on that Court. Nominee Professor Ken Gormley has no judicial experience, but his professional accomplishments as a teacher, a scholar, and an author of legal treatises should provide a base of experience that will allow his transition from law professor to a judicial role to be relatively seamless. Therefore, since these four nominees are well-qualified for the positions to which they have been nominated, I urge speedy confirmation by the Senate. While I clearly understand that there is a procedure to be followed, the Senate should be aware that each day’s delay in the confirmation process results in a consequent delay in disposing of the important matters that come before our appellate courts and a consequent delay in dispensing justice to our citizens. I would also like to address what I feel is an unfair labeling of any of the nominees as being perceived to be “pro” or “anti” one position or another by focusing on a single case, or even several cases, as evidence that the nominee is biased towards one party, especially when such remarks are directed to a judicial officer. Some commentators have focused on only a small part of the judicial record of Judge James Colins and have somehow gleaned a “pro-governor” bias on his part. This is totally unfair. It is only through an examination of Judge Colins’ entire body of judicial opinions that one may, with any accuracy whatsoever, discern the judicial philosophy of this judicial officer. But, to be accurate in any sense in this labeling, one must necessarily consider how the Supreme Court dealt with Judge Colins’ thousands of opinions on appeal. However, such an in-depth analysis is more appropriate for a law review article and not for the confirmation process, especially where any delay is inimical to dispensing justice. Furthermore, to hold against a judge a position that a qualified judge takes in any legal matter is a direct assault against judicial independence. Judges are sworn to decide matters on the law and on the facts and not to please one party or another. In every decision rendered on appeal, there is usually a disappointed party: the non-prevailing party. But that does not mean the jurist is biased. Having dealt with many of Judge Colins’ opinions that have been appealed to this Court on the fourteen years that I have served on this Court, I can only conclude that Judge Colins decides all matters that come before him with integrity, fairness, and by faithful application of the law to the facts of the case. The Senate will do a great service to the Commonwealth by acting promptly on the Governor’s nominations of the four individuals for the appellate courts. Very truly yours, Chief Justice Ronald D. Castille cc: Hon. Dominic Pileggi, Senate Majority Leader Hon. Robert J. Mellow, Democratic Leader Hon. Stewart J. Greenleaf, Chair, Senate Judiciary Committee Hon. Jay Costa, Judiciary Committee, Democratic Chairman