Skelos v. Paterson (Regarding appointment of Richard Ravitch as lieutenant governor)

This case concerns whether New York Gov. David A. Paterson exceeded the bounds of his legal authority when he appointed Richard Ravitch lieutenant governor. Paterson argues that Ravitch’s appointment was authorized by the Public Officers Law, which allows the governor to fill vacancies in elective offices. On Aug. 7, 2009, the NYCLU filed an amicus brief with the Appellate Division of the Second Judicial Department that offered an alternative argument for sustaining the governor’s position.

This argument rests upon the U.S. Constitution’s promise of representative democracy and functioning legislatures in each state. During the month preceding the Ravitch appointment, the New York State Senate stopped functioning. The Ravitch appointment assisted in breaking the legislative logjam and helped restore representative democracy to the voters and taxpayers of this state. On Aug 29, 2009, a four-justice panel of the Appellate Division unanimously ruled that “the governor simply does not have the authority to appoint a lieutenant governor.” On Sept. 22, 2009, the state Court of Appeals reversed the lower courts in a 4-3 decision that upheld the governor’s authority to make the appointment. Legal 

State Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department Act. App. Div., No. 2009-06673 (amicus)