THE TRIALS OF JUSTICE MCDONALD

The consideration of Andrew J. McDonald to become Connecticut’s chief justice put the confirmation process on trial.

The U.S Constitution offers scarce criteria for the vetting process of judges, other than a mandate for “good Behaviour.”

If we could add an amendment, it would also be brief: “Keep politics out of it.”

Rejections of U.S. Supreme Court nominees began with President George Washington’s nomination of John Rutledge as chief justice. Rutledge, already serving a recess appointment, was denied after condemning the Jay Treaty with Great Britain.

Choices of the chief executive are typically honored as a nod of respect. The same tends to be true on the state level. President Barack Obama’s failed nomination of Merrick Garland was a political atrocity, from which Connecticut leaders have mined the wrong lessons.

Democrats promoted McDonald with ads and robocalls suggesting he is the target of a smear campaign, which achieved the same result with suggestions of homophobia.

Gov. Dannel P. Malloy courted Republican votes Thursday by offering to fill McDonald’s state Supreme Court seat with former GOP Sen. Andrew Roraback. ⏩

Senate Republican leader Len Fasano, who was a running back at Yale, played a more poised game of political football. “(McDonald is) not a team captain,” Fasano told the Hearst Connecticut Group Editorial Board during a 90-minute session Thursday. Fasano, a lawyer, laid out his case against Andrew McDonald with precision. His binder was filled with McDonald’s judgments, which he used to allege inconsistencies in methodology, interpretation and reasoning.

We object to the supporters on the grounds of distasteful politicking; to Malloy’s gambit for treating the process like a union negotiation; and to Republicans for lobbying too hard.

McDonald’s role in repealing the death penalty has driven opposition. At its core, McDonald’s critics question the judgment of a man who leans toward compassion and mercy. We choose that over its dark reflection.

That McDonald would be the first openly gay Supreme Court chief justice in the nation does matter. He has been an eyewitness to Connecticut becoming more inclusive during his 52 years. He wears his experiences as a badge symbolizing his record of empathy for the everyman. As chief justice, he can draw further diversity to the bar.

When 35 senators cast votes for McDonald Tuesday, they should consider such possibilities, rather than choose red or blue and leave McDonald one tally short. It is a different position, but he was overwhelmingly approved (30-3 by the Senate and 125-20 by the House) when he was confirmed to the bench five years ago.

The cautionary lesson for McDonald is to weigh how his progressive instincts shape his decision-making process. What must not influence such decisions is politics.

McDonald’s intelligence, distinguished experience and sense of equity has earned him our vote to be Connecticut’s next chief justice.

All of the senators — on both sides — need to demonstrate independent thought in making their decision. Otherwise, the only possible verdict on the confirmation process is that it has bruised all three branches of government.

When 35 senators cast votes for McDonald Tuesday, they should consider such possibilities, rather than choose red or blue and leave McDonald one tally short.