Link me to your source, please. It's nowhere near like that 2002 to the present (Mayor selects half of the 18 members, others select the rest) and, with respect, strongly doubt that it was "Mayor selects all members" before.
As you've been strongly quizzing and lecturing others in the thread about your expertise on this matter, so I'm sure you'll have the source material handy.
I'm no "expert" in this. Never claimed to be. I'm limited, just as you are, to what I find or have found on the Internet. Yes, the Mayor selects most or half of the members of the committee. (I never said he selects "ALL" of the members.) But he has right of refusal to any judicial nominee. Show me how many judicial nominees he sent back because they were not conservative or "constructionist".
You're trying to get those who are skeptical of Rudy's judicial appointing practices to prove something. That's the wrong answer. It is Rudy and the Rudybots' job to convince the skeptics that Rudy can be counted on to appoint good judges. His record isn't consistant with what conservatives want in judicial appointments.
Even if everything claimed about his inability to actually control the judicial nominations was correct, it doesn't help Rudy's case on whether he can be counted on the make the right kind of appointments. Yes, he keeps SAYING words to placate the gullible, but his record doesn't back them up whether he had full control over all of his judicial appointments or not. His record does not make his case.