Just over a year ago, this Law Tribune Editorial Board published an editorial in support of the re-appointment of former Connecticut Supreme Court Justice Richard Palmer. Palmer’s re-appointment had been faced with opposition in the Judiciary Committee on the basis of his votes in several high-profile cases as well as a charge of being an “activist judge.”

In our editorial, we cautioned the Legislature against going down a dangerous path of getting caught up in partisan, outcome-oriented opposition that had so infected the judicial nomination process at the federal level. Palmer, we urged, should be re-appointed because he was eminently qualified.