For years, Western New York’s party chairmen always found a way to fill their campaign coffers with major contributions from the candidates they anoint for State Supreme Court.
Some candidates forked over $7,500 two decades ago for the “expenses” of judicial nominating conventions. Others diverted thousands from their own campaigns for causes dear to party chairmen – the same leaders who determine not only nominations, but even guaranteed election through “cross-endorsement” deals.
Now, candidates for the state’s highest trial bench use a new way to support the chairmen who support them – through their spouses.
According to State Board of Elections records, the spouses of this year’s four Supreme Court candidates contributed more than $93,000 to parties and chairmen over the last decade – far more than contributions from the candidates themselves.
The principal beneficiaries are the various campaign accounts and causes of recent county Republican Chairman Nicholas A. Langworthy and Democratic Chairman Jeremy J. Zellner. The leaders deny any quid pro quo in selecting candidates for a 14-year term that pays $210,900 annually. But they emphasize that running for judge remains a political process, and that candidates need to participate.
“You have to get involved, but there is certainly no price tag involved,” said Langworthy, now the state Republican chairman. “That would be wrong.”
Nevertheless, campaign finance reports depict a pattern of contributions that intensifies as election year approaches. Some contributions, including those to the Friends of Nick Langworthy and the Zellner for Chairman committees, directly benefit the two county leaders’ efforts to remain in power.
The wife of one GOP candidate for judge made significant donations to Erin K. Baker, a political consultant who is Langworthy’s wife and was an unsuccessful Amherst Town Board candidate in 2017. Other dollars went to former Assemblyman Raymond W. Walter, for whom Baker worked as chief of staff.
All of the contributions followed regulations and are legal. And they often occur over several years as prospective candidates aim for a judicial opening.
The pattern stems from the state’s system of judicial nominating conventions, comprised mostly of party officials and patronage appointees. In virtually all conventions of both parties in recent years, delegates from throughout the eight counties of the Eighth Judicial District follow the direction of the Erie County chairmen.
Now, 17 years after The Buffalo News examined New York’s judicial nominating system in stories titled “Courting Big Money,” observers say only how money flows into party coffers has changed.
James J. Sample, a professor at Hofstra University Law School who has studied judicial elections in New York for two decades, says he is not surprised.
“The surprise in New York State would be that politicians would voluntarily self-regulate in ways that reflect virtue and democracy as opposed to self-interest,” he said.
“Special interests will be prioritized by people with the power to prioritize,” he added. “And in these elections, the people with the power are the county leaders.”
Spouses just happen to donate
This years’ Supreme Court candidates for three positions are Democrat Gerald J. Whalen, presiding justice of the Appellate Division’s Fourth Department; Democrat Diane Y. Devlin, an incumbent Supreme Court justice; Republican Deborah A. Haendiges, another incumbent justice; and Republican Gerald J. Greenan III, an administrative law judge.
State records dating to 2009 indicate:
• Devlin, the former Buffalo city judge, bought several low-level tickets to various fundraisers through her committee in recent weeks (standard practice for judicial candidates), according to state records. This year, she also gave $500 to Zellner for Chairman and $2,250 to Erie County Democratic Committee.
But her husband, Philip J. Alagna, was much more generous. He gave more than $29,000 to mostly Democratic political candidates and committees over the last 10 years, including $21,000 to the Erie County Democratic Committee and $750 to the Zellner for Chairman committee.
Devlin did not gain bipartisan backing from Langworthy and Zellner, and now faces Greenan in the only contested election this year for Supreme Court. The Erie County Bar Association rated her “well qualified.”
When asked whether anyone pressured her or her husband to make party donations, Devlin declined to comment, citing concerns about what she is allowed to say publicly under ethical codes for state judges.
• Greenan has held other political posts in the past and also contributed to various GOP efforts. But Greenan’s wife donated $20,150 to Republican causes other than her husband’s candidacy, making the contributions as Thalia Greenan, another $5,150 under her maiden name of Thalia Ladas, and $1,500 as Thalia Ladas Greenan.
Under the Ladas name, she donated $1,000 to Friends of Nick Langworthy (the county chairman’s account) in 2017, and $1,000 to Erie County Republican Committee-Finance in August of this year.
As Thalia Greenan, she gave three donations totaling $18,000 to Erie County Republican Committee-Finance in 2017-2018. One contribution of $8,000 in January 2017 was the sixth largest by an individual to the committee in the past decade.
Thalia Greenan, of West Seneca, also gave $2,500 to Baker’s Amherst Town Board campaign in 2017. As Thalia Ladas Greenan, she gave Baker another $1,500 that year.
Gerald Greenan, who has headed the State Liquor Authority’s Buffalo office, served on the state Parole Board, and is an administrative law judge, says his wife was never pressured to make contributions and did so on her own.
“She might have given something to them; I don’t know exactly,” he said. “She tries to help the party. She has her own finances.
“There’s no way I could get to this point without doing the legwork,” he added, explaining the need for buying tickets to political events. “The public wants somebody who puts himself out there. And to characterize this as 'pay to play' would be a travesty.”
Greenan said 30 years of legal experience and several years of interest in the bench resulted in his 2019 nomination. Though he did not receive the coveted bipartisan deal granted to Whalen and Haendiges, he did gain the nomination controlled by Langworthy, the Republican chairman.
His wife is friends with Baker, he noted; they were guests at the Langworthy-Baker wedding several years ago, and his wife was glad to donate to the Amherst campaign.
“The bottom line is that everything was done properly,” he said. “I’m surprised this is even a question.”
Greenan was rated “not recommended” by the Erie County Bar Association, which gave high ratings to the other three candidates running in this year’s election.
• Whalen, the presiding justice, has purchased many standard fundraising tickets through his committee this election year while giving $2,600 to the Erie County Democratic Committee. Cross-endorsed by the GOP, he also gave $1,000 to Erie County Republicans.
His wife, Nora, gave more than $22,000 in 75 separate gifts, many to judicial candidates. Significant donations included $1,500 to Zellner for Chairman, and $14,668 to the Erie County Democratic Committee.
The judge said he doesn’t know which candidates his wife supported. He said he was unaware of the extent of her contributions over a decade until informed by a reporter.
“My wife, who is retired after working in the court system for more than 30 years, is a bright, intelligent person who makes her own decisions,” he said. “She does not consult with me about making donations. We don’t even talk about it. ... She knows all about the restrictions a judge is under in terms of political involvement.”
When asked if he or his wife felt pressured by party leaders to make large donations to pave the way for his cross-endorsement, Whalen said: “You’re asking me to comment on a political situation, and as a judge, I cannot do that. ... I can’t comment on whether this is the best way to choose judges. It’s a fair topic of conversation for you as a writer, but as a judge, I can’t discuss it.”
Whalen is rated “outstanding” by the Bar Association and heads Western New York’s appeals court – two factors that traditionally could be considered in granting the bipartisan backing he received.
• Haendiges also has bought several standard fundraising tickets through her committee this year, but her most significant contributions were to Erie County Republicans at $3,080 and $1,000 to the New York Republican Committee on June 24. Cross-endorsed, she also gave $500 to Erie County Democratic Committee.
But her husband, Michael, gave more than $16,000 in 106 donations over the last decade. They included $800 to Friends of Nick Langworthy, $6,614 to Erie County Republican Committee-Finance, $400 to Erie County Republican Committee-Housekeeping, $625 to Friends of Erin Baker and $100 to Elect Amherst Republicans. Haendiges is an Amherst resident.
Haendiges did not return calls seeking comment, and is rated “well qualified” by the Bar Association.
No 'lopsided' deals
Even as candidates, judges are held to higher standards. They abide by ethical canons guiding their campaigns, and raise and spend money inside a prescribed time period around elections. Their decisions on the bench are supposed to be fair and impartial.
But the campaign season loophole allows candidates to buy tickets to political events and make contributions, often to committees that fund other races important to party leaders. And over the past several years, records indicate that donations totaling tens of thousands of dollars flow into party coffers – far more than the cost of tickets to fundraisers.
Zellner and Langworthy, as well as the candidates, emphasize that judicial candidates must compete in political contests, that the parties assist their efforts, and that substantial sums of money are required.
“People who run for office are typically involved in the political process – period,” Langworthy said.
Would a candidate be considered without making contributions to the party?
“Absolutely,” Langworthy said, but added he could think of no candidate for town, county, state or judicial office who does not contribute to their party.
Langworthy said any suggestion of a connection between contributions and judicial selection is “offensive,” saying The News adheres to an agenda and should lobby in Albany for change.
Zellner denied that his party ever pressures spouses to make political donations.
“Judges are severely hamstrung in terms of making political donations, but their spouses are not. Some spouses choose to do it,” he said. “I do not call the judges’ spouses and ask them for donations, but certainly, some of these people wind up on fundraising lists. If you run for judge, you are entering the political process.”
Zellner has often criticized the state’s method of choosing judges, but said he operates “within the system we have to work with.” He said if citizens want change they must get involved with government and politics and demand it.
In addition, cross-endorsements represent the ultimate power wielded by party chairmen, which this year resulted in bipartisan backing for Republican Haendiges and Democrat Whalen. Indeed, half of all judicial elections – 27 of 54 since 1995 – have now been decided through cross-endorsement by party leaders, not by voters.
Langworthy says he gets criticized for cross-endorsing some judges and neglecting others who might prove worthy.
“I didn’t design the system,” he said.
Zellner notes judicial nominating issues enter discussions every few years.
“The News writes stories about it, but nothing ever changes,” he said. “If people want to change the system, let’s sit down and have a conversation and find ways we can do that. But to be honest, I don’t have people stopping me on the street and saying, ‘We really have to find a better way to elect judges.’ ”
Lousy but legal
Sample, the Hofstra Law professor, said Western New York presents unique circumstances because of the region’s political competitiveness. He noted Democrats rule in New York City, while Republicans control the process in vast swaths of upstate.
“Its cross-endorsement aspect makes [Western New York] the center of this tragic universe,” he said, noting the competitive situation between Democrats and Republicans.
Sample’s study of New York’s convention system dates to the early 2000s when his Brennan Center for Justice at New York University Law School launched a 2006 challenge in Brooklyn federal court, citing The News' stories as an example of party control. District and appellate courts declared the convention system unconstitutional, only to be unanimously reversed by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2008.
In a concurring side opinion accompanying the high court’s decision, Justice John Paul Stevens said at the time the ruling should not be read as endorsing New York’s judicial conventions or disagreeing with the original ruling.
“I recall my esteemed former colleague, Thurgood Marshall, remarking on numerous occasions,” Stevens wrote, “the Constitution does not prohibit legislatures from enacting stupid laws.”
Sample concurs, and notes the common argument that the nominating conventions have produced many good judges over the years.
“Bad systems can produce good judges,” he said. “But that good outcomes occur, does not change the fact that the system is flawed.”
