At least there’s still a state ethics watchdog

As Gov. Kathy Hochul met with leaders in her Manhattan office to discuss the ongoing ethical scandal surrounding New York City Mayor Eric Adams, judges in Albany ruled to keep the state’s ethics watchdog in place in a rare modern win for ethical accountability (depending on who you ask).

The state Court of Appeals on Tuesday overturned two lower court decisions regarding the constitutionality of the Commission on Ethics and Lobbying in Government, ruling in a 4-3 decision that the roughly four-year-old ethics agency doesn’t run afoul of the state constitution. It’s a blow to former Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who had originally sued over the validity of the agency after it demanded he return millions of dollars that he received for a book deal during the COVID pandemic. 

Both a trial level court and an appellate court had previously sided with Cuomo, finding that COELIG’s creation and mechanisms for members to be approved or removed violated the separation of powers as laid out in the state constitution. After taking over for Cuomo, Hochul had pledged a new era of ethics oversight, pushing to replace the old Joint Commission on Public Ethics (a Cuomo creation) with the new agency, established through legislative means as a way to decrease executive control over the watchdog meant to also monitor the governor. But Cuomo argued it was too independent, and he initially won.

On Tuesday, though, four of the seven Court of Appeals judges wrote in their majority opinion that the ethics agency does not violate the constitution and can continue its existence. “While the Act extends very close to the boundary of permissible legislation, it is not ‘intrinsically a constitutional affront to the separation of powers doctrine,’” Associate Judge Jenny Rivera wrote for the majority. “We therefore conclude that the Act is not unconstitutional in every conceivable application.”

Good government groups, which had fought for the continuation of COELIG, lauded the Court of Appeals decision as a victory for ethics oversight across the state, particularly in light of what has been happening in New York City with the Adams case. Last week, Trump’s Department of Justice asked Manhattan federal prosecutors to dismiss Adams’ corruption case in an unusual memo, prompting a cascade of resignations by career prosecutors who would not comply. “This decision is a bright spot amidst national and local ethics turmoil, particularly given the U.S. Department of Justice’s recent actions to erode the Southern District’s independence,” a group of good government groups wrote in a statement. The group included Reinvent Albany, the New York Public Interest Research Group, Citizens Union and Common Cause New York.

Mayoral candidate and state Sen. Zellnor Myrie drew a connection between Cuomo’s attempts to dismantle the ethics agency and the actions that President Donald Trump has taken to circumvent or control the outcomes of ethical or criminal investigations into him. “Now more than ever, we need leaders who do not fear independent ethical oversight – unlike Donald Trump, Andrew Cuomo, and Eric Adams,” Myrie wrote in a statement. 

The leaders of COELIG also celebrated the ruling, calling it “validating” for the court to uphold the decision to create a more independent agency. Chair Leonard Austin and Executive Director Sanford Berland didn't directly reference the downstate turmoil, but suggested that now is a particularly turbulent time for ethics in the state. “That validation is especially important now, when the need for an agency with our mission is as great as it has ever been,” they said. The agency has a previously scheduled meeting set for Wednesday. 

Cuomo spokesperson Rich Azzopardi said in a statement that the former governor plans to file for reconsideration of the case. He also questioned the motivations of the judges who ruled in favor of COELIG, saying that it was “disturbing that any judge of NY’s highest court would countenance flagrant violations of the constitution when it conflicts with what is most convenient for the political class.”

Azzopardi dismissed comparisons between Cuomo’s lawsuit against COELIG and the situations involving Trump and Adams as “ridiculous,” adding that “clearly any of the professional hyperventilators saying that didn’t bother to read the decision which admitted there were constitutional issues despite their ruling.”