Judges lost the case regarding their own pension: US court upheld the age limit
In the US, the New York Supreme Court rejected the challenge to New York's 157-year-old requirement that judges must retire at the end of the year in which they turn 70, writes Timesunion.
In a 13-page decision, the majority of the court concluded that this restriction was not altered by the recently adopted amendment to the state constitution. It was a "per curiam" decision — a legal term for a ruling made by the court as a whole, rather than authored by an individual judge.
The constitutional amendment, approved by voters in 2024, added several new grounds for discrimination prohibitions to the state constitution. One of them was age, meaning the document now explicitly prohibits age discrimination.
Three state Supreme Court judges filed a lawsuit against the state after the amendment's adoption, arguing that it abolishes the mandatory retirement age for judges.
These judges were forced to retire due to their age. There is a possibility for judges to remain in office for a few more years if certified by state judicial system officials, but the plaintiffs sought the complete removal of the age limit.
However, the mandatory retirement age is also part of the state constitution, creating a legal conflict that was resolved by the court on Thursday.
The court ruled that the new amendment does not repeal the existing age limit in the state constitution.
"The age retirement limit is part of New York's constitutional architecture," the decision states. "State voters, legislators, members of the judiciary, and judicial candidates understood that judicial service is limited in this way."
Chief Judge of the Appellate Division Rowan Wilson and Judge Madeline Signas did not participate in the decision.
The three judges challenging the age limit were represented by John M. Leventhal, a retired judge of the Appellate Division, Second Department.
"My clients and I are disappointed by the Appellate Division's decision, although my clients are judges and former judges, and I am a former judge, we respect the court's ruling," Leventhal said.
This is the second blow to opponents of the age limit in the last two decades: voters rejected an amendment in 2013 that would have raised the mandatory retirement age to 80.
Subscribe to our Telegram channel t.me/sudua and to Google News SUD.UA, as well as to our VIBER and WhatsApp, our page on Facebook and on Instagram to stay informed about the most important events.
