NEW YORK STATE ASSEMBLY MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF LEGISLATION submitted in accordance with Assembly Rule III, Sec 1(f)
BILL NUMBER: A1100A
SPONSOR: Bores TITLE OF BILL:
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION OF THE SENATE AND ASSEMBLY proposing amendments to
article 6 of the constitution, in relation to the number of supreme
court justices in any judicial district
PURPOSE OR GENERAL IDEA OF BILL:
The act would remove the current constitutional limitation on the number
of Supreme Court justices, allowing the legislature to set the number of
justices, as they can for every other court.
SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS:
Section 1 - Removes the constitutional cap on the number of judges in a
given judicial district Section 2 - Establishes the effective date
JUSTIFICATION:
New York's court system is demonstrably and impossibly backlogged. A
common-sense solution would be to add more judges to overburdened
courts, but an archaic provision of the New York State Constitution
arbitrarily caps the number of legislatively authorized Supreme Court
seats at one justice per 50,000 people in each judicial district.
However, the number of cases processed by New York courts annually has
tripled since the cap was last amended in the early 1960s, and liti-
gation has become more time-consuming and complex. State Supreme Courts
in The Bronx, Manhattan, and the Capital District are currently at their
constitutionally-capped number of justices and Queens, Brooklyn, and
Staten Island are close, meaning the Legislature is powerless to create
additional judicial seats to meet the ever-growing backlog of cases. The
judicial backlog emanating from the constitutional cap leads to substan-
tial delays in the administration of justice, not to mention increased
costs and agony for litigants. Worse, as a stopgap measure to ensure the
functioning of courts in capped districts, judges are designated from
other courts to hear cases on an acting basis, reducing both expertise
and judicial capacity elsewhere in the state.
The Uncap Justice Act would simply strike the constitutional cap on the
number of Supreme Court justices. It does not increase the number of
judges in any judicial district, but instead gives the legislature the
flexibility to enact legislation as needed in order to deliberately and
appropriately create new seats in state Supreme Court districts where
the need is greatest, similar to how the Legislature creates judicial
seats for every other state trial court. The people of New York State
are entitled to a modern, flexible, evidence-based method of assessing
the state's judicial needs, as is the case in many other states and the
federal judiciary. Until this bill is passed and the cap is removed, New
Yorkers will be barred from the justice they so desperately seek in our
Supreme Court. While other reforms are also necessary, this amendment is
vital - and long overdue.
PRIOR LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:
2023-2024: A5366/S5414 - Passed Assembly and Senate
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS FOR STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:
None.
EFFECTIVE DATE:
The foregoing amendments be submitted to the people for approval at the
general election to be held in the year 2026 in accordance with the
provisions of the election law.
STATE OF NEW YORK
________________________________________________________________________
1100--A
2025-2026 Regular Sessions
IN ASSEMBLY
January 8, 2025
___________
Introduced by M. of A. BORES, BICHOTTE HERMELYN, CUNNINGHAM, RAGA,
GONZALEZ-ROJAS, BURDICK, SIMONE, LEE, DE LOS SANTOS, MAGNARELLI,
KELLES, HYNDMAN, EPSTEIN, SEAWRIGHT, DINOWITZ, GALLAGHER, GIBBS,
SIMON, WEPRIN, CRUZ, GLICK, RAJKUMAR, DAVILA, TANNOUSIS, FORREST,
R. CARROLL, RIVERA, TAYLOR, ZACCARO, ROSENTHAL, FALL, DAIS, JACKSON,
REILLY, REYES, PIROZZOLO, ALVAREZ, BENEDETTO, SEPTIMO, SHIMSKY,
BERGER, ROZIC, MAMDANI, SAYEGH, LEVENBERG, STIRPE, ZINERMAN, SHRESTHA,
STECK, LASHER, WRIGHT, ROMERO, BARRETT, TORRES, TAPIA, LUNSFORD --
read once and referred to the Committee on Judiciary -- committee
discharged, bill amended, ordered reprinted as amended and recommitted
to said committee
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION OF THE SENATE AND ASSEMBLY
proposing amendments to article 6 of the constitution, in relation to
the number of supreme court justices in any judicial district
1 Section 1. Resolved (if the Senate concur), That subdivision d of
2 section 6 of article 6 of the constitution be amended to read as
3 follows:
4 d. The supreme court is continued. It shall consist of the number of
5 justices of the supreme court including the justices designated to the
6 appellate divisions of the supreme court, judges of the county court of
7 the counties of Bronx, Kings, Queens and Richmond and judges of the
8 court of general sessions of the county of New York authorized by law on
9 the thirty-first day of August next after the approval and ratification
10 of this amendment by the people, all of whom shall be justices of the
11 supreme court for the remainder of their terms. The legislature may
12 increase the number of justices of the supreme court in any judicial
13 district[, except that the number in any district shall not be increased
14 to exceed one justice for fifty thousand, or fraction over thirty thou-
15 sand, of the population thereof as shown by the last federal census or
16 state enumeration]. The legislature may decrease the number of justices
17 of the supreme court in any judicial district, except that the number in
EXPLANATION--Matter in italics (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
[] is old law to be omitted.
LBD89031-02-5
A. 1100--A 2
1 any district shall not be less than the number of justices of the
2 supreme court authorized by law on the effective date of this article.
3 § 2. Resolved (if the Senate concur), That the foregoing amendments be
4 submitted to the people for approval at the general election to be held
5 in the year 2026 in accordance with the provisions of the election law.
