The problem with Gov. Maura Healey nominating her ex as a Supreme Judicial Court justice is not that it came from a small rubber-stamp panel – the problem is the thorny ethical questions the nomination raises.

What was the timeline for when Healey decided on nominee Gabrielle Wolohojian?

When did Healey first have conversations with Wolohojian about joining the SJC?

Was the nomination part of some kind of deal Healey worked out as she and her partner were going through a contentious breakup?

Was any ethics opinion sought on the nomination and where is it? Regardless of whether Healey was worried that the nomination was above board, she still should have gotten ethical clearance first. State ethics law says to avoid even an “appearance” of a conflict of interest.

When will Wolohojian have to recuse herself from making a ruling involving the governor’s office for a conflict of interest?

Will anyone on the rubber-stamp Governor’s Council have the guts to ask these tough questions?

No one is contesting Wolohojian’s credentials or experience as a jurist. She has plenty.

And for many decades, governors have been putting people on the SJC who have close personal ties to them. From Gov. William Weld to Gov. Charlie Baker, it’s common for chief executives to pick buddies for SJC spots. If you don’t have political connections you don’t get the appointment.

And Weld and Baker relied on a wide circle of panelists to serve on their nominating committees, much wider than Healey’s five-person team.

But that didn’t seem to matter because they all relied on cronyism to make their picks. Was there a nationwide search for Robert Cordy? Or David Lowy? No, the size of the nominating panel makes no difference.

But this is the first time we know of that a governor has appointed an ex-romantic partner to the high court with whom she had a breakup. It was equivalent to a divorce.

So the ethical questions the nomination raises are critical. Just don’t count on the lame Governor’s Council to ask them.

When’s the last time the council rejected an SJC appointment? A number of councilors are lawyers who argue cases before judges so it’s not surprising that they rubber-stamp the candidates.

But someone needs to ask the difficult ethical questions before it’s too late. And Healey herself should be forced to answer them.