Last night at the Danbury Democratic Town Committee meeting, Deputy Speaker and State Rep. Bob Godfrey voiced his frustration with the timing of Gov. Rell's judicial nominee announcement.
For those not in the loop, a little background is in order.
Late Wednesday afternoon, Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell nominated one Superior Court Judge to the Supreme Court to fill a vacancy and 10 lawyers to the Superior Court. However, according to lawmakers in charge of the legislature’s Judiciary Committee, the path to confirmation for the 10 Superior Court judges is “murky” at best.
Lawmakers said they will look at confirming Superior Court Judge Dennis Eveleigh to fill the vacancy left by Supreme Court Justice Christine S. Vertefeuille, but the other nominations are questionable.
Rep. Michael Lawlor, co-chairman of the legislature’s Judiciary Committee, which is responsible for vetting potential judges, said he won’t support any of the nominations until the budget crisis in the Judicial Branch is resolved.
“They have no money,” Lawlor said. “They’re closing courthouses and law libraries.”
The salary for each of the judges could cost the branch as much $150,000 per year, when its already had to scale back its operations after Rell vetoed a bill that would have exempted the Judicial Branch from cutting $7.8 million over the next two years. That decision has forced the branch to start closing courthouses, law libraries, and other programs and because of the early retirement plan there are 400 fewer court interpreters, clerical staff, as well as judicial marshals to provide security.
“Many of these people are very qualified,” but “it’s unlikely they will get confirmed,” Lawlor said Wednesday in a phone interview.
[...]
Ironically, Rell’s Budget Director Robert Genuario, who has maintained that the cuts to the Judicial Branch were necessary, was one of the 10 nominees to the Superior Court bench Wednesday.
04.25.22 (RADIO): WSHU Latino group call on Connecticut lawmakers to open a Danbury charter school
06.03.22 (OP-ED): KUSHNER: "Career Academy ‘a great deal for Danbury"
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
The amended complaint states that plaintiffs sought to remedy the continued discriminatory and unauthorized enforcement of federal immigration laws against the Latino residents of the City of Danbury by Danbury's mayor and its police department.
Plaintiffs allege that the arrests violated their Fourth Amendment rights and the Connecticut Constitution because defendants conducted the arrests without valid warrants, in the absence of exigent circumstances, and without probable cause to believe that plaintiffs were engaged in unlawful activity. In addition, plaintiffs allege that defendants improperly stopped, detained, investigated, searched and arrested plaintiffs. Plaintiffs also allege that defendants violated their Fourteenth Amendment rights when they intentionally targeted plaintiffs, and arrested and detained them on the basis of their race, ethnicity and perceived national origin. Plaintiffs raise First Amendment, Due Process and tort claims.
Plaintiffs request declaratory relief, damages and attorneys fees.
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
