Connecticut Senate Bill SJ00024

Connecticut 2017 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/4/17
• Refer: 1/4/17
• Report Pass: 1/13/17

Caption

Resolution Confirming The Nomination Of The Honorable William J. Sullivan Of Waterbury To Be A State Referee.

Impact

If confirmed, Judge Sullivan's appointment could enhance the judicial process and potentially improve the administration of justice across Connecticut. The role of a State Referee typically involves presiding over various judicial matters, thereby assisting in alleviating caseloads in the courts. This amendment could boost public confidence in the state's legal system, especially within the Waterbury region where Sullivan resides. The successful confirmation might also pave the way for greater collaboration among different levels of the judiciary. However, challenges concerning the selection process and retaining qualified candidates remain pertinent as such appointments are critical to the state's legal framework.

Summary

Senate Joint Resolution No. 24, introduced in January 2017, seeks to confirm the nomination of the Honorable William J. Sullivan of Waterbury to serve as a State Referee for an eight-year term. The resolution indicates the state government's formal endorsement of Sullivan's qualifications and suitability for the role, which is significant for maintaining judicial integrity and efficiency within the state judiciary system. Confirmation by the General Assembly is an essential part of the process for filling judicial positions at various levels.

Contention

The discussion leading to the confirmation vote did not highlight significant opposition, and the vote result showed a unanimous approval from the House, indicating broad political support for Sullivan's nomination. However, general concerns about potential political influences in judicial appointments could arise in future discussions, especially regarding how nominees are evaluated and selected. While there appeared to be consensus on Sullivan’s capabilities, ongoing debates may affect the nomination processes for future appointments in judiciary roles, particularly ensuring that candidates are evaluated based on merit rather than political considerations.