New York Decides on Retirement Age for JudgesThe Paralegal Resource
November 7, 2013 — 921 views
The new propositions that were given out recently mentioned the age of retirement of Judges of State Supreme court. According to one of the propositions, the mandatory age of retirement for justices serving in State Supreme Courts as well as Court of Appeals will be raised to 80.
Presently, justices serving at the State Supreme court which is also a trial-level court are required to retire from their post at the age of 76. On the other hand, the court of Appeals, which is also the highest court of the state, presently allows judges to serve till the age of 70. If the new law gets passed, additional judges will be made available to serve at courts that are usually overcrowded with cases.
Judges Willing to Serve Longer
This news also saw a lot of reaction from judges who wish to serve even after the age of 70, which is the present age of retirement for most courts. Among such enthusiastic judges is State Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman. He is among the three judges in the top court of the state who have shown their desire to stick to their post even after they cross 70 years of age. They will do so in case the constitution passes the amendment which talks about rising the age of retirement to 80.
Lippman had originally pushed to rise the age of retirement for all of the judges to 80. He said that he is willing to relieve his services along with six of his colleagues from the Court of Appeals.
But the Legislature ultimately agreed to add a much limited proposal for the voters which would affect only the judges of Supreme Court. Other than this, it also allows the judges of Court of Appeals to complete their term of 14 years even after passing the present retirement age which is 70.
Lippman along with the other two judges of the Court of Appeals – Eugene Pigott and Robert Smith will all hit the age of 70 in the next three years. A Spokesman revealed that all the three of them plan on serving for longer in case the measure gets passed.
Critics not Happy with the Current Proposal
This reaction by Lippman has raised a few questions by the critics. Apart from that, the critics are also arguing that the proposed measure does not include the judges serving in country, criminal, as well as family courts. They added that these courts should also be included as the number of cases pending in these courts is very large.