On March 11, 2026, two members of the New York State Legislature announced that they had filed a complaint against Chief Judge Rowan Wilson of the New York Court of Appeals. The complaint has reportedly been submitted to the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct (CJC).
Sen. Anthony Palumbo (R-New Suffolk) and Asm. Michael Tannousis (R-Great Kills) asserted that comments made by Chief Judge Wilson at a February 27 forum at the City University of New York compromised his judicial neutrality. Sen. Palumbo is the ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, while Asm. Tannousis is the ranking member of the Assembly Judiciary Committee. The Republican members of the Judiciary Committee in both chambers have endorsed the complaint against Chief Judge Wilson. The forum focused on the Second Look Act, a bill that “would give people sentenced to a decade or more in prison the chance to petition a judge to have their sentence reconsidered.”
At the forum, Chief Judge Wilson called New York’s current sentencing laws “stupid” and voiced support for the Second Look Act. He claimed that New York’s prison system keeps inmates locked up even after they have been rehabilitated. “I’m responsible for a whole branch of government, and I don’t like stupidity,” he added.[1]
Chief Judge Wilson also asserted that another New York judge had described a defendant as ‘an animal’ who ‘should be put in a cage for the rest of their life.’ Expressing displeasure with this unnamed judge’s intemperate remarks, the Chief Judge said: ‘Judges here are elected or in some cases are appointed by elected officials. And one thing that all of you can do is find out who those people are, and there are organizations who are starting to do that and starting to publicize that. And when those judges come up to be elected, don’t vote for them and get other people not to vote for them. That’s something you can do for me.’”
Chief Judge Wilson’s comments have raised concerns about his compliance with the New York Code of Judicial Conduct. 22 NYCRR 100.4(A)(1) states that a judge “shall conduct all of the judge’s extra-judicial activities so that they do not [cast] reasonable doubt on the judge’s capacity to act impartially as a judge.” By speaking at a forum and describing certain criminal sentencing laws as “stupid,” Chief Judge Wilson may have led some New Yorkers to question whether he can remain impartial in cases involving those laws.
Furthermore, Chief Judge Wilson may have crossed a line by urging his listeners to vote out certain judges. 22 NYCRR 100.5(A)(1)(c) provides that a judge shall not engage in partisan political activity, while 22 NYCRR 100.5(A)(1)(e) states that a judge shall not publicly oppose or publicly endorse a candidate for office unless that judge is running against the candidate in question. The Republican complainants assert that Chief Judge Wilson “issued a ‘negative endorsement’ by instructing the audience to identify judges who make offensive comments and to ‘not vote for them’ when they seek reelection.” “‘Now we have a chief judge at a symposium actually telling the public not to vote for judges that he does not agree with,’” Asm. Tannousis said. Sen. Palumbo added that if the Chief Judge’s comments go unchallenged, “‘the floodgates are open and we’re going to have politics completely infecting that area of our state that should be sacrosanct.’”
A court spokesperson denied that Chief Judge Wilson’s remarks were inappropriate.
If the CJC finds that a judge has committed misconduct, it can cause that judge to be “privately cautioned, publicly admonished, publicly censured, removed from judicial office or retired for disability.”
The structure of the CJC makes it unlikely that Chief Judge Wilson will be punished for his comments. The CJC has 11 members: four appointed by the governor, three by the chief judge of the Court of Appeals, and one each by the four legislative leaders. Since New York government is fully Democratic-controlled, only two of the current 11 members are Republican appointees. Six are Democratic appointees, and three were appointed by Chief Judge Wilson himself. Additionally, anyone punished by the CJC can appeal that punishment to the New York Court of Appeals. In other words, if Chief Judge Wilson were punished by the CJC, he could appeal directly to the very court he oversees.
Whether Chief Judge Wilson’s recent remarks amount to judicial misconduct remains uncertain. At the very least, however, his comments were unwise and problematic. Judges are expected to avoid speaking publicly about their views in a way that could generate controversy. Chief Judge Wilson should exercise greater caution and serve as a better example for his colleagues on the bench. New York Families appreciates that Sen. Palumbo, Asm. Tannousis, and their colleagues have spoken out against them.
[1] It is no surprise that Chief Judge Wilson has taken a left-wing position regarding criminal sentencing laws. The Chief Judge, who has been a member of the Court of Appeals since 2017 and has served in his current role since 2023, can best be described as a flaming liberal. In 2022, then-Associate Judge Wilson penned a 70-page dissenting opinion arguing that an elephant named Happy possessed the legal right to petition a court to release it from the Bronx Zoo. He wrote: “‘[T]he evidence tendered by Happy demonstrates that Happy has very substantial cognitive, emotional and social needs and abilities, and that those qualities coupled with the circumstances of her particular confinement establish a prima facie case that her present confinement is unjust.’” He added that the arguments and evidence presented on behalf of Happy were “‘consistent with the kind of showings made by abused women and children and enslaved persons’” in other cases.