Supreme Judicial Court nominee Judge Gabrielle Wolohojian largely escaped questions during a confirmation hearing Wednesday about her past romantic relationship with Gov. Maura Healey and the potential impact it could have on her ability to hear future cases before the top court.

Wolohojian now appears to be on a glide path to sit on Massachusetts’ highest court after members of the Governor’s Council raved about her 16 years on the Appeals Court and largely offered their support for her nomination.

Even after some councilors broadcast earlier this month that they wanted to ask Wolohojian about her ties to Healey and whether that would lead her to recuse herself from cases before the high court involving the governor or her office, only one question was offered on the topic during the hearing.

Instead, colleagues, friends, family, lawyers, and judges showed up to the State House to cheer Wolohojian, who was described by many as a highly qualified judge who can hit the ground running if approved to the highest court in the state.

Councilor Eileen Duff said she was “so excited” that Wolohojian applied for the open Supreme Judicial Court spot vacated by former Justice David Lowy, who retired earlier this month for a job at the University of Massachusetts.

“I know it’s been controversial in some circles, but ‘A’ player’s hire ‘A’ players, and that’s what I think we’re doing right now,” Duff said. “We do in Massachusetts have the best court system in the United States and we want to have the best and brightest.”

Of the seven members on the Governor’s Council, Councilors Marilyn Devaney, Christopher Iannella, Terrence Kennedy, Joseph Ferreira, and Duff either offered their praise or explicitly backed Wolohojian ahead of a vote that could come as early as next week.

Healey’s nomination of Wolohojian turned heads at the start of February because the two had been together for more than 10 years, even briefly living together, before separating in 2019.

During her time on the Appeals Court, Wolohojian recused herself from cases involving the section of the Attorney General’s Office where Healey worked as assistant attorney general. The judge also took a pass on “all cases” that involved the Attorney General’s Office when Healey was later elected attorney general, a court spokesperson said.

“Justice Wolohojian resumed hearing cases handled by the Attorney General’s office after the election of Attorney General (Andrea) Campbell,” the spokesperson, Jennifer Donahue, said in a statement.

Healey previously said Wolohojian would not have to recuse herself from cases involving the governor’s office. Wolohojian declined to answer reporters’ questions after the hearing Wednesday, including on her past relationship with the governor.

“I am very proud to be here with my mother today,” Wolohojian said when pressed by reporters.

Devaney questioned Wolohijan on whether there “is any matter that would come up” that could warrant recusal. Wolohojian said recusal “is something that I take very seriously” and should be done on a case-by-case basis.

“I want to add here that I think for those of us who are judges, and lawyers, we understand that there’s a danger in over-recusal as well as a danger in under-recusal,” she said. “You’re trying to get recusal right. And that you can only do by looking at each case individually. I have absolutely no interest, and never have, in sitting on cases I shouldn’t sit on, or not sitting in cases I should sit on.”

Healey addressed the past relationship head-on at the outset of the meeting, telling a packed auditorium it “should not deprive the people of Massachusetts of an outstanding SJC justice.”

Healey, who quickly left the hearing without taking questions from the council, said there is no person more ready to hit the ground running on day one of the job than Wolohojian and “there are no ethical issues” with the nomination.

“As we’ve heard today, and as I have consistently heard from advisors I trust and as I know from experience, Judge Wolohojian is a remarkable jurist, uniquely talented, thoroughly prepared, generously willing to serve, and deeply committed to our judicial institutions,” Healey said. “And I know that personally.”

Councilor Tara Jacobs attempted to address the “optics” of the nomination, telling Wolohojian that she researched laws around nepotism, talked to professors who are experts on ethics, and read various legal codes of conduct.

“There’s optics here and it’s troubled me, and it’s been reflected from others. And having said that, I have truly struggled with it,” Jacobs said. “The optics matter to me because there’s the perception of our courts having integrity, having trust in our courts.”

Wolohojian said the nominating process she took part in under Healey was no different than when she applied for an open Supreme Judicial Court spot under former Gov. Charlie Baker, with whom she interviewed for the post.

Wolohojian, who received the recommendation of a nominating commission put together by Baker, did not ultimately earn the job. A group of five people, including Healey’s chief of staff and chief legal counsel, recommended Wolohojian to the first-term Democrat.

“Sitting from my chair, I have done everything like every other candidate and I don’t know what else I can do, other than do the process that’s been really in place since the Dukakis administration,” Wolohojian said in response to Jacobs.

Gov. Maura Healey testified at the hearing. (Stuart Cahill/Boston Herald)