As Donald Trump settles into the Oval Office once again, it’s clear that he plans to use his second term the way he used his first: to appoint conservative ideologues to life appointments on the federal courts. The coming years will lock in a transformation of the federal judiciary that will leave these courts increasingly hostile to individual rights and civil liberties.
This reality means that state courts have emerged as the only forum in which most Americans can hope to have their rights protected and their interests fairly considered against the power of the government and large corporations. This presents opportunities, especially since the public can engage with state courts far more easily than with federal courts. In New York, we can and must rise to meet this moment — and we have examples of how to do so.
New York’s courts once blazed jurisprudential trails, standing as a beacon of civil rights. The year before the Civil War began, New York’s highest court, the Court of Appeals, mandated the release of eight slaves because they had arrived in New York — refusing to follow the Supreme Court’s infamous Dred Scott decision. In Lochner vs. New York in 1905, the Supreme Court struck down a New York statute that limited bakers’ working hours — overruling the Court of Appeals, which had upheld the law.
And when Benjamin Cardozo served on the Court of Appeals, before his appointment to the U.S. Supreme Court, New York led the nation in developing modern contract law, expanding civil rights protections, and establishing crucial precedents that would influence other courts around the country. Cardozo’s brilliant, forward-thinking opinions demonstrated how state courts could serve as laboratories of law and engines of social progress.
But for decades now, the Court of Appeals has shown institutional timidity, rather than the courage that once defined it. This retreat was most pronounced under former Chief Judge Janet DiFiore, under whose leadership the court heard fewer cases than it had in decades and repeatedly sided with powerful interests over individual rights.
The judicial selection process has traditionally been dominated by political insiders away from public view. But The Court New York Deserves, a judicial accountability campaign that we at the Center for Community Alternatives launched in 2022, challenged that.
By bringing unprecedented attention and scrutiny to the judicial selection process, and by encouraging regular New Yorkers to weigh in on who would serve on their high court, the campaign achieved something extraordinary: the first-ever rejection of a governor’s nominee to the Court of Appeals, followed by the elevation of one of New York’s most highly regarded jurists, now-Chief Judge Rowan Wilson.
This historic outcome proved that democratizing judicial selection can produce tangible and immediate results, challenging the belief that we benefit when judicial selection decisions are made in private by a select few.
There is far more work to be done. New York’s lower courts, where most New Yorkers encounter the legal system, still stand in the way of justice and progress. These courts too often operate as defenders of an unjust status quo, function with minimal accountability, and regularly undermine legislative reforms.
Pro-transparency efforts have begun illuminating previously shadowy aspects of judicial decisionmaking. These transparency initiatives have met significant resistance from within the court system — a telling indication of just how much the status quo depends on operating outside public view.
At the start of the second Trump presidency, the imperative for action around state courts is clear. Americans across the country, especially in progressive states like New York, must recognize that state courts are the key to protecting our rights in the years ahead. And this recognition requires us to act: We must all demand transparency and accountability from our state courts, and we must make our voices heard in the judicial selection process, using our political power to advocate for bold, inspired state court judges.
We must demand that our state courts step into the void left by retreating federal courts, and embrace New York’s history as a leader in protecting rights against an activist federal judiciary. The alternative — courts that fail to protect our fundamental rights — is unacceptable.
Our path forward as New Yorkers is clear, if challenging. The future of American justice depends on our willingness to engage with and transform our state courts, starting right here in New York.
Martin is the director of judicial accountability at Center for Community Alternatives, where he leads The Court New York Deserves.
