Massachusetts Governor Raises Eyebrows by Naming Ex to Top Court

Gov. Maura Healey’s (D) nomination of her former romantic partner, Gabrielle Wolohojian, for a seat on Massachusetts’ highest court is sparking ethics concerns from the public that some lawyers say are unfounded.

Wolohojian’s professional path to the Supreme Judicial Court is typical, having served on Massachusetts’ Appeals Court for 16 years. But her close ties to the governor raise some questions around whether she can be unbiased hearing cases related to Healey’s initiatives.

“Whenever a judge is asked to decide a case of importance to the policies of the person who appointed her, the question always arises: Won’t the judge’s gratitude for the appointment threaten her independence?” asked Stephen Gillers, a professor emeritus at NYU School of Law who studies legal and judicial ethics. “The answer to this question about independence is always no.”

Healey “has doubled-down by appointing a former lover. So the public may ask the same question because of that relationship as well,” Gillers said.

Healey defended her nomination at a press conference, telling reporters that Wolohojian was the most qualified candidate for the job and shouldn’t be disqualified because of their years-long personal relationship.

Her nomination will next go before the Massachusetts Governor’s Council, an eight-member group that considers judicial nominations.

Ethical Questions

Healey, previously the state attorney general, told reporters Wednesday that she thought Wolohojian would be able to participate in cases related to her administration, as she has done as an associate justice on the Appeals Court.

Nothing in Massachusetts’ legal or judicial ethics rules, or from the American Bar Association, “forbids the appointment,” Gillers said.

Martin Healy, chief legal counsel for the Massachusetts Bar Association, said he doesn’t think Wolohojian would necessarily have to recuse herself on cases involving the governor’s agenda.

“When she served on the Appeals Court, she had to make decisions regarding potential conflicts of interest all the time,” Martin Healy said. “If anything were ever to come up regarding a direct matter involving the executive branch, she would take that decision making very seriously and if she needed to recuse herself she would,” but there aren’t many cases where a governor is sued in their individual capacity, he said.

Amy Carnevale, chair of the Massachusetts Republican Party, said in a statement that the governor’s nomination is “highly inappropriate” and urged Healey to withdraw the nomination.

The Massachusetts Committee on Judicial Ethics recently opined on a related issue—whether judges must recuse themselves when presiding on a case involving an attorney who they had a personal relationship with. That opinion found it’s up to a judge’s “sound discretion” to decide whether they should be disqualified from a case, as long as they analyze whether they can be impartial and whether that impartiality could be questioned by an outsider.

Strong Qualifications

If confirmed, Wolohojian, 63, could spend seven years on the bench as the culmination of a decades-long legal career. As an associate justice for the Appeals Court, Wolohojian has heard more than 2,700 cases and authored more than 900 decisions, according to a press release from Healey’s office.

“The fact that she is so highly qualified mitigates against the concern or perception that this is somehow not a legitimate appointment,” Martin Healy said, adding that the nomination has received widespread support from the local legal community.

Wolohojian “distinguished herself from her colleagues” on the 25-member Appeals Court by chairing various committees and leading an effort to make jury instructions more accessible to the general public, Martin Healy said.

Wolohojian was previously a partner in the litigation department at Hale and Dorr, now known as WilmerHale.