Gov. Healey’s former romantic partner, Judge Gabrielle Wolohojian, approved to SJC

A group of elected officials approved Appeals Court Judge Gabrielle Wolohojian, the former domestic partner of Gov. Maura Healey, on Wednesday for a seat on Massachusetts’ highest court.

Wolohojian’s elevation to the Supreme Judicial Court turned heads earlier this month because of her years-long relationship with the governor, questions about whether that would lead Wolohojian to recuse herself from cases involving Healey or her office, and the recommendation process.

Members of the Governor’s Council signed off on Wolohojian’s nomination after a hearing last week where the Appeals Court judge largely escaped questions about her past romantic relationship with Healey.

The council confirmed Wolohojian to the court on a 6-1 vote.

Wolohojian was not present at the hearing but her supporters, including Healey, have argued she is the most qualified person for the job having served 16 years on the Appeals Court.

Councilor Marilyn Devaney said she has never seen so much media attention given to a court appointment.

“She has changed case law that is hundreds of years old,” Devaney said. “I welcome the media. And we don’t get them. And I have been asking, please investigate our nominees. Report on them. Come to our hearings. And it doesn’t happen. And I want to welcome them.”

Councilor Tara Jacobs said she still has concerns with the nomination process.

“I have struggled with a sense that the process itself was lacking,” she said.

She said a five-person panel — which included Healey’s chief of staff and chief legal counsel —  that recommended Wolohojian to Healey lacked “diversity” and called Wolohojian an “insider nominee.”

“I continue to have some concerns around her recusal situation. But I will say that I received many, many communications … and for me it has been a very mixed set of communications,” Jacobs said.

Jacobs, who voted against the nomination, said Wolohojian “has breathed rarified air from the time she was young”

“My perception … is she intellectualizes the marginalized communities’ struggle in a way that very much feels … detached from the struggle itself,” she said. “I do have a concern about whether justice is best represented through that lens.”

At a hearing last week, Wolohojian defended her nomination.

“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,” she said.

Councilor Paul DePalo said the discourse around the nomination “jumped over” Wolohojian’s qualifications and instead focused on a “salacious” story line. DePalo said he was “disappointed with the public discourse” around the nomination.

“When do we stop policing a woman’s body?” he said. “And to those who tell me that a relationship that ended years ago should be disqualifying, should I advise … my daughters not to date an ambitious person?”

Councilor Terrence Kennedy said the only process that counts is that which takes place among Governor’s Councilors, who are tasked with vetting judicial nominees.

“The governor can nominate whomever she chooses and then it is our job to find out if that person is qualified,” Kennedy said.

This is a developing story…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Previous post Can conservative Latin American populists motivate the Hispanic vote? Republicans are counting on it
Next post Chicago White Sox manager Pedro Grifol gives an offseason update — including what he recently told starter Dylan Cease