What is a federal judge doing ruling on a decision about how the state selects is own Supreme Court justices?
What jurisdiction does the federal government have over this matter or is this another example of federal activism like last month when a federal court wouldn't let a state legislature decide if its own members had been legitimately elected?
My thought, exactly. The selection of state judges is a matter for the State of New York to decide, and is none of the federal government's business.
While we need to see the case which brought this to the Court I would guess that jurisdiction involves the denial of rights to the agrieved party.
My thoughts exactly. The federal courts should not have jurisdiction in this matter. Let the people of NY clean up their mess. More judicial tyranny. At some point, who knows when, a state legislator or governor will publicly tell a federal judge to stuff his unconstitutional decision where the sun doesn't shine. Our republic will be better for that day.
Do you want the correct answer or the politically correct answer?
PC Answer: Why, Baker v. Carr ensures that every political office is fairly voted upon by the electorate under the fundamental rule of one man, one vote, and enshrining the Constitutional guarantee that each state have a republican form of government.
Correct Answer: The judge is doing exactly what you fear, saying, "Federalism takes it up the back door, the state bosses better figure out quick who really runs the show--it's FEDERAL bosses, us judges."