>

Do you have any examples of this judge casting aside precedent or the rule of law to further his agenda?
Why does the New York Democratic Party suck so bad? And I say this coming from the state with what is arguably the 2nd worst state Democratic Party, Texas. I mean, here, the state party is merely weak and completely ineffective. The NY party seems to be actively anti-Democratic Party. >

If you start your opinion with “Judges rule according to the law, not according to politics” you’re already wrong. I don’t know how this country got convinced that judges are apolitical neutral parties that can only determine a single answer that’s totally fair always, all judges interpret the laws through their own biases, left and right. Judges are just people who happened to go to law school, not law-machines. >

And if you start with not knowing the facts of the case just assuming "Democracy Now" has no agenda you are already wrong. 
Do you know the facts of the case? I do. And the judge was right. >

As far as I know I’ve literally never looked at Democracy Now before this moment but sure, I’ll keep that in mind. Can you explain to me why you think judges don’t rule with their own biases, genuinely curious how you can reach that conclusion. >


Can you explain to me why you think judges don’t rule with their own biases

I am sure some do, however there is an entire appeals process to go through and they found the judge ruled fairly. So in this case it is not justified to just claim the judge is biased. >


In terms of anti-labor decisions, there was a case where an employer, Cablevision, was suing union leaders.  
And even though that’s illegal in New York, Hector LaSalle went out of his way to say that even if the employer could not sue them as union leaders, he could sue them as individuals, basically exploding and rolling out the red carpet to a loophole to sue labor leaders.  
And that’s why five labor unions have also come out against Hector LaSalle, in addition to the 10 senators who have, as well.

Wow, LaSalle is as corrupt as they come, evidently. But then again he is a conservative.
I don't understand why Gov. Hochul would nominate such an apparently toxic judge w/such an anti-democratic, anti-abortion, anti-labor ruling record.  Unless Gov. Hochul has also had her palms greased in exchange for this toxic nomination.
I hope the progressive opposition succeeds as the fascist right has really fucked this country up - intentionally - so what is sorely needed in govt is LESS backwards, hateful rightwing regressives in positions of power, not more.
Given his atrocious record Hector LaSalle should definitely be kicked to the curb. Shame on Gov. Hochul for making such a toxic pick, surely she can do better? >

Democrats keep doing this. You elect a goddamned liberal and they put fifteen federalist society judges on the bench. Better than the twenty five the republicans do but still frustrating as all hell. >

Hochul is a supreme disappointment, even for a liberal corporate Democrat. 
People like her are actively disenfranchising would-be Democratic voters. >

She is very rich and she is enacting policy that favors the affluent instead of her constituents the majority of which are not rich. Typical rich person governing for the rich.. >

That's the story of New York in a nutshell. >

We really need to stop this horseshit. >

Yikes. Would it kill the New York Democratic Party to avoid creating these splits in the first place? Seriously, Hochul, what the hell? >

And the “centrists” wonder why progressives believe they are two sides of the same coin when it comes to economics. Here is your answer:

But his conservative judicial record has been opposed by progressives because of his anti-abortion, anti-labor and anti-bail reform positions >

The judge she nominated is a Centrist and he does not reflect the majority of the Democratic party in New York State. This is why she has opposition and I hope he fails to move forward. A Democratic Governor should not be nominating a Republican Light Judge to the judiciary. Especially for what he is being nominated for. To run the whole division. Top Judge. >

Conservatives: only vote for conservatives and nominate conservative judges because they think liberals are evil.
Liberals: nominate conservative judges because they think it’s a novel idea to demonstrate a spirit of bipartisanship and cooperation. 
Conservatives: continue to only vote for conservatives and nominate only conservative judges because they think liberals are evil.
Rinse and repeat. 
Hochul, and the people in her office, are naive enough to think we’re still playing by the same political rules of the decades past while they’re trying to score bipartisan points with people so un-bipartisan they tried to coup the government. Pity on them. This isn’t your mamas politics. This is realpolitik. The right would rather execute congress than see liberals run government. We don’t resolve the political issues of our day by continuing to elevate people who want to destroy the system for some false belief in bipartisanship. We get out of this situation by growing a backbone and standing up to the christo-fascist bigots at every turn. 
When the kids ask how the GOP took away their rights, don’t forget to leave out the part where the Democrats gave them away. >

I would love to be in a situation where we weren't having purity tests on ideology in the Democratic Party except when you can't detect and stop this kind of stupidity fast enough from the right leaning flank of the party. >

Hochul continuing where Cuomo left off. remember the only reason republicans won back the house is because of the NY distrcit map which cuomo and his republican appointments drew to attack progressives. >

Why do Democrats continue to believe in fairy tales? Republicans would never ever consider a liberal nominee- hell, they won’t even consider a conservative if s/he is moderate. Lucy pulls the football away every time, Charlie Brown. >

Anyone got some more info on what the deal is here? >

Looks to be the combination of playing to identity politics and using the legislature to assist in getting someone else Hochel would prefer. LaSalle is Latino, but conservative, so by nominating him and having the legislature reject him, she can come back with someone else she'd prefer (probably more moderate), she can then go to the Latino community and say "I tried," and still get their support. If Hochel started with a progressive/more liberal candidate, it becomes harder to go back to the independents/more moderate electorate and claim she isn't kowtowing to the progressive caucus in the legislature. 
There's probably more back-room politicking going on, but that's the most I can gather from the limited public information on the issue.
edit: There appears more to the story. Looks like if LaSalle gets the spot on the top court, he said he'd then put a more progressive person in his old seat as the court system’s chief administrative judge. Gotta love local politics; plenty of spinning plates to pay attention to, in addition to the broader picture (show). >


LaSalle is Latino, but conservative

Then why do Republicans oppose his confirmation? >

Because he's too liberal. If you want to know who is really on the left ask a Republican, the more they hate someone the better they are. >


If you want to know who is really on the left ask a Republican

lol.
Come on, man.
They will literally call anyone a socialist. People like Hillary Clinton and George Soros are on their most hated lists. Who they wail about the hardest is not in any way indicative of how left that person's politics are, it's only indicative of whether or not it's strategically helpful for them to vilify that person.
If you want to know who is really on the left then familiarize yourself with leftist policies and then judge a person based on their past and present platform stances. Asking republicans is the absolutely most foolish thing to do. They either do not know the definitions of any of the buzzwords they use in the case of the dumb ones, or they intentionally misuse words in the case of the less dumb ones. >

platform stances huh? What if they never get any of there stances accomplished? Then they turn around and vote with Rs for bs purity reasons. Look at voting records, when talking about judges don't just read the headline, research the decisions people are using against them. >

We need to figure out a better system than judges.  Seems this is a constant issue over and over and over.   All this power to a person that is appointed.  What the hell.. damn. The majority of the US systems and policies are so broken and outdated.  I am aware the majority of it is intentional to keep the power where those that have it want it, but damn.  So many broken systems. >

Some states elect judges >

Again, more examples of a broken system.  Some of it this way. Others do it that way.  We can do better. >

Well originally the USA was supposed to be closer to the EU, with each state being it's own country. That's why they have so much power.
Personally I'd be all for a massive Constitutional overhaul if there was a way to guarantee we didn't end up with a dictatorship >

After handing off Congress to republicans, NY Democrats should be ashamed of themselves and keep apologizing for the next two years. >

In this day and age, why would a Dem governor appoint a conservative judge to any top court? Dems like shooting themselves in the foot. Or is she a Trojan Horse? >

Under normal circumstances I would not be opposed to a Democrat nominating a Conservative judge and vice versa.  We should be able to chose who we believe is the best person for the job regardless of ideology.
However.  One side of the aisle in this country very clearly wants to establish one-party rule.  And until those traitors can be rooted out Conservatives must be kept out of positions of power by any means necessary.  Democracy demands it. >

Establish one-party rule in order to prevent it.  Makes sense >

You're making the "both sides are the same" error.
Conservative judges have no issue with casting aside precedent or the rule of law to further their agenda.   And until they can keep their entho-theocratic ideals under control they shouldn't be judging anything.