Remarks by Gov. George Pataki on Law Day at Pace University School of Law, May 1, 1996

Pataki, George

English

DigitalCommons@Pace

Pace Law Review Volume 16 Issue 3 Summer 1996 Article 1 June 1996 Governor's Remarks George Pataki Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/plr  Part of the Environmental Law Commons, and the Judges Commons Recommended Citation George Pataki, Governor's Remarks, 16 Pace L. Rev. 463 (1996) Available at: https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/plr/vol16/iss3/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Law at DigitalCommons@Pace. It has been accepted for inclusion in Pace Law Review by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@Pace. For more information, please contact dheller2@law.pace.edu. PACE LAW REVIEWVolume 16 Summer 1996 Number 3Governor's RemarksLaw Day at Pace University School of LawMay 1, 1996Good evening. It's a pleasure to be here today. And it is atremendous personal honor-both as a lawyer and as Gover-nor-to accept this honorary Doctorate of Laws from PaceUniversity.Certainly Law Day opens up a wide range of topics. But Iwant to focus on two subjects: first, the environment and envi-ronmental law; second, the independence of the judiciary.I truly believe-as I know many of you at Pace Universitybelieve-that we can use laws to preserve the natural resourcesof our state while also developing a healthy economic environ-ment. Precisely that is the fundamental policy of our state, setforth in the very first paragraph of the Environmental Conser-vation Law.1Those two goals can and have been achieved in regionsthroughout New York State. We must never view them as ir-reconcilable adversaries; instead, for the sake of all, we mustalways strive to achieve both. In that quest, we vindicateThomas Jefferson's view on the purpose of laws, and the rolethat laws have in shaping a better world. He said, "[liaws and1. N.Y. ENVTL. CONSERV. LAW § 1-0101 (McKinney 1984).4631PACE LAW REVIEWinstitutions must go hand in hand with the progress of thehuman mind."On a day as beautiful as this, we are reminded that wemust shape our laws to the laws of nature. We are rich as astate because citizens in the past have nurtured a tradition ofcaring about nature. Governor Theodore Roosevelt did much tobuild and enrich that tradition. In 1908, as President,Roosevelt told the nation, "[o]ne distinguished characteristic ofreally civilized men is foresight. We have to, as a nation, exer-cise that foresight for this nation in the future."Used properly, and sparingly, the law can be a positiveforce in the lives of present and future generations of NewYorkers and all Americans.Last year, I signed a new law that builds on Roosevelt's en-during legacy. It's a law that will help make New York a better,cleaner place to live. It's called the Solid Waste Penalties Law 2and, for the first time in fifteen years, it increases the penaltiesfor illegal dumping, finally making the penalty fit the crime. Itsends a clear message to would-be polluters that their crimesagainst the environment will not be tolerated in New YorkState. In fact, this legislation was an important weapon in thecollective efforts of the State, the local municipality and [the]Pace Environmental Law Clinic in [their] successful struggleagainst one of the worst violators of our solid waste laws, whichfacility was located right here in Westchester County, in theVillage of Hastings. The new law stiffens both criminal andcivil fines by as much as twenty times. The worst offenders-the most unscrupulous of the illegal dumpers-now face felonycharges, punishable by up to four yeai.3 in prison for fouling ourenvironment with their illegal trash.We cannot allow criminals to gain an economic advantageover honest competitors. It's quite simple. We are helping busi-ness and local government understand our laws so they cancomply, and we are cracking down on the ones who don't.One thing students have learned here at Pace University isthat there are countless laws and regulations-especially in theenvironmental field. We are working to help businesses under-2. N.Y. ENVTL. CONSERV. LAW § 71-2703 (McKinney Supp. 1996) (amended L.1995, c. 508).464 [Vol. 16:4632https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/plr/vol16/iss3/1LAW DAY REMARKSstand those rules so they don't get lost in the maze and makeunfortunate, unintended mistakes.By emphasizing compliance, we can stop pollution before ithappens. But as a complement to that effort, we must remainvigilant in the fight against illegal pollution by putting teeth inour environmental laws. We have made too many gains envi-ronmentally for us to ease up on that effort.Pace Law and your environmental program have gained aworld-wide reputation in leaders of the field of environmentallaw, and for that you should be justly proud.I am pleased that more and more of us who care about envi-ronmental protection recognize that we can balance that impor-tant goal with economic growth.Last year, I signed an historic agreement that will protectand preserve Long Island's Pine Barrens, an ecologically sensi-tive area that also sits over a portion of Long Island's aquifer.For years, local governments, developers and environmentalistsbattled each other at every turn over this issue, stagnatinggrowth and creating bitter differences between all sides. Ouragreement ended that period of bitterness by protecting vastportions of the Pine Barrens while setting up ground rules fordevelopment in the less environmentally-sensitive areas. Bystriking the right balance, we have enhanced Long Island's en-vironment for generations to come and enabled the Island'seconomy to move forward.And that is exactly what we achieved by putting togetherdisparate interests to protect New York's watershed. Manypeople deserve thanks and praise for an agreement that pro-tects the drinking water for nine million New Yorkers, savesNew York City billions of dollars and sets up ground rules foreconomic growth for the watershed communities.I want to thank, in particular, two individuals associatedwith the Pace Environmental Law Clinic: John Cronin, fromthe Hudson Riverkeeper, and Bobby Kennedy, John's able coun-sel and [Pace University] law professor.Working with my Chief Counsel, Michael Finnegan-aPace graduate himself-we were able to overcome years of dis-trust and bitterness between residents of the watershed, NewYork City and environmental groups. With their help, we were1996] 4653PACE LAW REVIEWable to provide both environmental protection and economicgrowth.There are times, however, when the right balance meansallowing environmental concern to outweigh economic consider-ations. We faced that decision this year in Allegheny StatePark.Many people wanted me to allow commercial logging in[the] park, that I believe is one of New York State's crown jew-els. Our State Park's staff looked at the issue. They listened toarguments from all sides. But in the end, I decided that therewas no compelling reason to open the park to commerciallogging.But I didn't just rule out commercial logging. We also es-tablished new protections for old-growth forest lands. We en-hanced protection for the 770-acre, old-growth Hemlock-Hardwood stand, known as the Big Tree area. It is a timelesstreasure that you-and now our children-can enjoy for yearsto come.The economy and the environment must co-exist. Both arecrucial to our future as a state, and we must be committed toensuring that both prosper. I would like to remind you of thevery first words of our Environmental Conservation Law:The quality of our environment is fundamental to our concern forthe quality of life. It is hereby declared to be the policy of theState of New York to conserve, improve and protect its naturalresources and environment . .. to enhance the health, safety andwelfare of the people of the state and their overall economic andsocial well being.3With these opening words, New York law recognizes and pro-claims the need to achieve both a healthy environment and ahealthy economy.And just as a healthy environment and a healthy economycan co-exist in harmony, so too can an independent judiciary co-exist with criticism of that branch of government. As we cele-brate today in New York the critical role of the judiciary in pre-serving our liberties, it seems fit to cite the words of a NewYorker: Alexander Hamilton. Hamilton was perhaps the mostbrilliant legal mind New York has ever produced, notwithstand-3. N.Y. ENVTL. CONSERV. LAw § 1-0101(1).466 [Vol. 16:4634https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/plr/vol16/iss3/1LAW DAY REMARKSing the fact that he was, among other things, a newspaperman.In Federalist No. 78, Hamilton wrote that the general liberty ofthe people can never be endangered so long as the judiciary re-mains "truly distinct from both the legislative and theexecutive."Like Hamilton, I cherish the transcendent importance of anindependent judiciary. Throughout our history, that indepen-dence has served our people well. It took an independent judici-ary to rule that separate but equal was not equal. It took anindependent judiciary to rule that a citizen could not be pun-ished, simply for speaking out in opposition to the government.It took an independent judiciary to rule that all defendants, re-gardless of their wealth, are entitled to effective representation.And it took an independent judiciary to proclaim that no personwas above the law, not even a sitting president.We are secure in our liberties today because the courtshave defended our right to freedom. The independence of ourjudiciary has enabled judges to rise above the passions of themoment to promote the cause of justice in our state. As Gover-nor, it is my solemn obligation to ensure that the judiciary re-mains, in Hamilton's phrase, "truly distinct from both thelegislative and the executive."But a critical question remains: Must a Governor or a leg-islator withhold criticism of the judiciary? Does criticism of ju-dicial rulings constitute an "attack" on judicial independence?Does respect for the judiciary command silence when one dis-agrees with a court's pronouncements?The answer, clearly, is no. As Justice Brandeis stated,"[t]hose who won our independence believed ... that public dis-cussion is a political duty . ... Believing in the power of reasonas applied through public discussion, they eschewed silence co-erced by law . . . ." Justice Felix Frankfurter put it best:"Judges as persons, or courts as institutions, are entitled to notgreater immunity from criticism than other persons or institu-tions . . . . [J]udges must be kept mindful of their limitationsand of their ultimate public responsibility by a vigorous streamof criticism expressed with candor however blunt."The legitimacy of inter-branch criticism, moreover, is im-plicit in the very structure of our government. Like its federalcounterpart, the New York constitution charges the chief execu-4671996]5PACE LAW REVIEWtive to "take care that the laws are faithfully executed"4 and to"recommend such matters to [the legislature] as he shall judgeexpedient."5 As Governor, these are my responsibilities. But Ialso carry with me the strong, fundamental belief that the firstobligation of government is to protect its citizens from crimeand violence.Pursuant to these duties and beliefs, I have recommendedlegislation and taken other actions relating to a host of issuesfacing our criminal justice system, and crime. I have proposedchanges in the Criminal Procedure Law that would removeloopholes and technicalities that add nothing of substance tothe fairness of trials, yet deny justice to victims of crime. Ear-lier this year, I announced the "Domestic Violence and PublicSafety Act of 1996."6 That act is aimed at strengthening theprosecution of crimes of domestic violence, which Chief JudgeKaye has rightly called a "modern-day scourge."In addition to enabling prosecutors to bring felony chargesin a much wider array of circumstances when orders of protec-tion are flouted, the bill redresses two glaring imbalances incurrent law. First, it authorizes prosecutors to appeal undulylenient sentences, just as defendants enjoy the right to appealunduly harsh sentences. Second, it accords prosecutors theright to obtain review of bail decisions comparable to the rightdefendants enjoy.These aspects of the bill represent no attack on the judici-ary; [r]ather, they rest on the undeniable proposition that eventhe best of judges make mistakes. My support for the bill re-flects another lamentable fact: these mistakes can have tragicconsequences for the victims of domestic violence and othercrimes.Our system of criminal justice is, after all, not just aboutcriminals, and lawyers, and judges and juries . .. It is aboutpeople. Most of all, it is about the innocent people who are vic-tims of crime. Young women scarred forever by the horriblecrime of rape. Families, the very backbone of society, torn apartby domestic violence. Young men, energized by the limitless4. N.Y. CONsT. art. IV, § 3.5. Id.6. S. 6621, 219th Leg., 2d Reg. Sess. (N.Y. 1996).468 [Vol. 16:4636https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/plr/vol16/iss3/1LAW DAY REMARKSpossibility of their futures, shot down in the midst of theirascent.Mothers and fathers should not have to bury their children.But too often, they must. Violent crime makes that so.Grandmothers should not be left to care for their grandchil-dren, left motherless by violence. But too often, they are.The victims of crime love and laugh. They are just like you,and they are just like me. They hope and dream. They arehappy, and they feel sadness. They get lonely, and they enjoythe company of others. Too often, they get killed, and all of thejoys and wonders of their humanity are taken from them, andfrom us.Last week, at a church on the upper west side of Manhat-tan, I was privileged to attend a candlelight vigil to rememberthe victims of crime. At the front of the church was a large pos-terboard, and people were encouraged to come forward and affixphotographs to it of family members who were victims of violentcrimes.One look at the photographs confirmed that crime does notdiscriminate. There were pictures of young and old, male andfemale, black and white, Christian and Jew.One of the photographs was of a young mother killed justthis year, the victim of a preventable crime of domestic violence.The woman's five-year-old daughter saw the photograph, wentback to her grandmother and asked her this question: "Ismommy going to be here today?" The little girl was KatrianaKomar.The people who become victims of crime get killed, beaten,raped and robbed. And then they must too often endure thecriminal justice system, in the hopes that justice is done.Through it all, it is their families, innocents like five-year-oldKatriana, who look to each of us in this room and ask: How canthis happen?It is my constitutional duty to ensure that the scales of jus-tice are not tipped against the rights of victims.I will take a back seat to no one when it comes to ensuringthat a defendant receives a fair trial. But when courts becomecitadels of technicality-protecting the guilty and not the inno-cent-it is my duty to urge reform. I will not neglect that duty.I will do as my conscience demands.1996] 4697PACE LAW REVIEWI will speak out. I will fight for justice. When the courtsays the laws are not clear, I will propose new laws that areclear. When the system says the lines must be defined moresharply, I will propose laws that provide that definition. In thebest tradition of the American principles of democracy that giveus our freedom, I will criticize when criticism is warranted.When I see little girls like Katriana Komar, I will not besilent. I will take steps to ensure that our innocent people areprotected. I will insist that defendants, while entitled to a fairtrial, have no claim to a perfect trial.And, in particular, I would be remiss if I blinked at anyweakness in our criminal justice system, regardless of itssource. Criticism, then, is both legitimate and salutary.With the historic freedoms that we have all fought so hardto preserve, we also accept historic responsibilities. Freedom tocriticize, of course, carries with it obligations. Here, the wordsof another great New York jurist, Judge Learned Hand, seemfit. Judge Hand said, "while it is proper that people should findfault when their judges fail, it is only reasonable that theyshould recognize the difficulties in judging . . . . Let judges beseriously brought to book, when they go wrong, but by thosewho will take the trouble to understand them."I will continue to take the trouble to understand, and mycriticisms will remain respectful of our courts, and of the dedi-cated men and women who serve on them. Believing, withBrandeis, in the power of reason as applied through public dis-cussion, I am happy to be judged by that standard.Once again, I want to thank you for [the] privilege of ad-dressing you here today. Receiving this honorary degree from aUniversity that [is] home to some of the brightest environmen-tal minds is an honor I will remember and cherish forever.Thank you and good night.[Vol. 16:4634708https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/plr/vol16/iss3/1

Governor\u27s Remarks

https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1974&amp;context=plr

Governor\u27s Remarks

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

DigitalCommons@Pace