Special Commission on the Future of the New York State Courts

efforts), make the case for reform more compelling than it ever
was before.
The Overwhelming Calls for Reform
Restructuring would create a
court system that “would be
flexible, nimble, and readily
able to allocate cases to underutilized
courts. It would save
litigants time and resources,
and would greatly ease the
pressure on overwhelmed
courts.”
– Association of Judges
of the Family Court of
the State of New York,
January 2007
In addition to the various commissions, panels, and other
bodies that have studied New York’s court system over the past
decades, numerous business, political, legal, civic, goodgovernment,
and other organizations have voiced their support
for court reform. Collectively, these groups have delivered a
remarkably clear and consistent message: New York’s court
system is outdated, inefficient, and badly in need of change.
The consensus behind this message reflects a broad
collection of organizations from across the political, geographic,
and economic spectrum. This group is not exclusively urban or
rural, upstate or downstate, Democrat or Republican. Rather, it
spans the ideological compass, composed of varied bodies
representing wide-ranging interests. In the past decade alone,
more than fifty such groups have taken a public stance in favor
of restructuring, joining an already-broad and diverse statewide
coalition. 114
114
See Press Release, N.Y. State Office of Court Admin., Court Restructuring
Proposal Prompts Broad Display of Support (May 12, 1998) (listing the
following organizations: American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, New York
Chapter; American Jewish Congress; Association for Children for Enforcement of
Support; Association of Judges of Hispanic Heritage; Association of Judges of the
Family Court of New York State; The Association of the Bar of the City of New
York; Buffalo Area Metropolitan Ministries; Business Council of New York State,
Inc.; Catholic Charities of Schenectady County; Center for Law & Justice, Inc.;
Child Care Council of Suffolk; The Children’s Aid Society; Citizens Committee
for Children; Citizens Union; The City Club of New York; Committee for
Modern Courts, Inc.; Commercial Lawyers Conference, Inc.; Correctional Association
of New York; Franklin H. Williams <strong>Commission</strong> on Minorities; Graham-
Windham Services to Families and Children; Guild of Catholic Lawyers, Inc.;
Inter-Faith Impact; Jewish Board of Family and Children’s Services; Judicial
Process <strong>Commission</strong>; Law, Order and Justice Center; League of Women Voters of
New York State; Legal Aid Society; The March 19th Coalition; National Committee
to Prevent Child Abuse – New York State; Northeast Parent and Child Society;
New York Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children; New York City
Partnership and Chamber of Commerce; New York State Association of City Court
Judges; New York State Association of Court of Claims Judges; New York State
Community of Churches; New York State Court Appointed <strong>Special</strong> Advocates Association,
Inc.; New York State Judicial Committee on Women in the Courts; New
York Urban League; People for the American Way; Rockland County Bar Association,
Inc.; Schenectady Inner City Ministry; State Communities Aid Association;
Statewide Youth Advocacy; Supreme and County Court Clerks Association;
Troy Area United Ministries; United Jewish Federation of Northeastern NY; Victim
Services Agency; Women’s Bar Association of the State of New York;
Women’s Prison Association; and YWCA of Schenectady).
58
A Court System for the Future, February 2007