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.
I'm far from a Rudy-bot (don't like his immigration, Gore-bal warming and gun stances), but with all respect, you seem --
1) to be a devoted Rudy critic (which is your right); AND
2) to have pursued this thread/issue aggressively, BUT ONLY UNTIL someone else pointed out that NYC's mayor has relatively little say over whom (as local, not state) judges he can pick.
At soon as #2 occurred, you back off and say stuff like "it's not my burden" etc. etc. I find it hard not to read that as another way of saying, "OK, ya got me: I can't prove that Rudy picked MORE-liberal judges than he could have."
Here, BTW, is what I found about how it's done since 2002: http://www.nyc.gov/html/acj/downloads/pdf/exec_order_8a.pdf
I misspoke earlier in saying that (in the current system) the mayor picks 9 of EIGHTeen. It's 9 of 19, including the chairman. Again, I don't know how it USED to be, pre-2002 --- whether Bloomberg only made small changes vs. large ones.
You write, "His record isn't consistant with what conservatives want in judicial appointments." I don't understand that statement. One can be for liberal policies **enacted legislatively** (and Rudy surely was for some liberal policies) yet be bitterly opposed to "judicial legislation." Felix Frankfurter comes to mind.
I'm not saying I 100% believe Rudy, mind you; he hurt his "no judicial activism" case by suing gun manufacturers and upholding the "sanctuary" policy aggressively. I just think the picture is more mixed, and less unfavorable to Giuliani, than you are painting.