City Hall promoted the mayor’s 19‑member judiciary advisory panel as a truly representative cross‑section of New York City’s legal profession.
The panel is tasked with screening and recommending candidates for judgeships across all five boroughs and for various courts, including Criminal, Family and, on an interim basis, Civil Court.
Four Jewish bar associations have criticized the composition, noting that not a single Jewish attorney was appointed to the committee.
The groups, supported by a civil‑rights organization, sent a joint letter to the mayor and to state officials demanding that the omission be corrected.
In the letter they warned that excluding Jewish voices from a body shaping the city’s judiciary sends a troubling message at a time when antisemitic incidents are on the rise.
The correspondence was also addressed to the governor, the attorney general, the chief judge and other relevant officials.
Recent violent episodes have intensified concerns, including an incident in which a hammer‑wielding intruder entered a Jewish institute’s grounds and injured an eight‑year‑old boy, and a separate stabbing of an Orthodox Jewish man after leaving a synagogue.
Police have not identified a motive in the first case and continue to investigate the second, where the attacker reportedly shouted extremist slogans.
The mayor’s office and the advisory committee declined to comment on the matter.
A spokesperson for the mayor rejected claims that the appointments were motivated by religion, emphasizing that the slate includes judges from a range of backgrounds, including Jewish jurists.
The spokesperson added that a retired Jewish justice was not appointed after the administration learned of his prior representation of a high‑profile client.
Legal analysts note that the panel’s recommendations influence courts that handle hate‑crime cases, making inclusive representation especially important.
Critics argue that a city with the nation’s largest Jewish population deserves proportional representation on a committee that helps shape the judiciary.
The dispute remains unresolved as community leaders await a response from the mayor’s administration.
