10 thoughts on “Challenger Critical of Longtime Governor’s Councilor in State Primary Race

  1. “At the end of the debate, Devaney said that Dolan had run for Democratic State Committee member in Concord in January 2020 when she was still living in Watertown.

    Dolan did not have an opportunity to respond during the debate, but Watertown News reached out to her. She said: “There is no truth to that statement. I moved back to Concord in November, 2019 and registered to vote here in January, 2020.”

    I know who I believe. Beyond time for a change!!

  2. I am very concerned that Mara Dolan is a lawyer.

    Lawyers appear before judges, and they file cases in courts ruled over by judges.

    That ‘s a conflict of interest and a problem in all kinds of ways for a Governor’s Councilor.

    Please allow me to explain.

    As a Governor’s Councilor AND a lawyer, a person (in this case Attorney Dolan) will be voting for or against a judicial nominee that you (in this case, Atty. Dolan) may appear before or file a case with.

    Even if a Governor’s Councilor never encounters that particular judicial nominee in court, existing judges know how the Councilor questioned the nominee and voted for or against the nominee.

    Things are political enough in this state without adding a conflict of interest into the mix. I think we all agree.

    Lawyers should not serve on the Governor’s Council, period.

    And it does not matter if some do now. They simply should NOT.

    • Ms. Gans, I have to agree.

      I too am worried that Mara Dolan is a lawyer and would be able to decide which other lawyers (friends? colleagues?) should become judges and which judges can be promoted to a higher judicial post.

      It’s a real concern.

      A Governor’s councillor should be completely independent from the judicial system in such a sensitive post.

      Also, judges should not be based on political ideology.

      They simply need to know and apply existing law. That’s all.

      Otherwise, the appointment of judges becomes simply a partisan thing.

      Remember, that can cut two ways. We don’t want that.

    • If anything we need more prosecutors as judges not public defenders. And the last thing we need is a lawyer, who has an inherent conflict of interest, confirming judicial nominees.
      Governor’s Councilors don’t have crystal balls. Half the time they are voting on some friend of the Governor, Lt Governor, or other connected Politico.
      Marilyn does her job far more thoroughly than any other on the Council. I haven’t always agrees with every judge she voted for. She readily admits to the fact that given the results, she couldn’t have foresaw, she’d like a vote to do again.
      But she DOES HER JOB. She doesn’t approach it based on any hard-core ideology, which this challenger seems to be promising.
      We need judges that will follow the laws as written by the State Legislature, assuring the law complies with both the State and Federal Connecticut AS WRITTEN and according to its original intent.
      If Mora Dolan wants to promote her personal hard-core ideology, then she should run for the Legislature. The Governor’s Council exists to confirm the qualifications and Judicial Temperament of the Nominiee, not what their opinion on a particular law is.
      Liberal Icon, Ruth Ginsgberg, refused to answer any question about specific laws, cases, etc, because it would prejudice the case. And this answer was good enough for Justice Ginsberg, whom although I rarely agreed, I must concede had a tremendous legal mind, then it’s good enough for any Massachusetts Judge.

  3. Michele and Miles,
    While we can agree to disagree on lawyers serving on the Govenors council there is one thing clear, we can all be better served with Marilyn not being there.
    Juts do a google search to see the numerous run ins she has had assaulting a poor women working a minimum wage job doing what she is supposed to. She has been a menace to this community and throughout the state. It’s all public knowledge. Google her.

  4. It sounds like the Council is a good old boys club that mainly has lawyers on it. This is concerning as these lawyers may encounter these judges on cases in the future and we see so many cases now in Washington, DC where judges seem to make decisions based on who nominated or approved them to positions. We need to break this bond so that we get back to reasonable, non-partisan decisions.

    If people, like Marilyn, stand up for principles and facts and stand against the other Councilors’ opinions to nominate the best people, I applaud these actions. We don’t need rubberstamp decisionmakers. Marilyn has always done her homework before making decisions and needs to be given a fair chance to continue to contribute to the Council.

  5. I’d like to understand why the other members of the council didn’t want meetings on YouTube. Marilyn Devaney can be very disruptive, and sometimes her arguments miss the big picture, but she has always stood up for transparency. I would need to know more about how this council works. The Boston Globe article was the first one I’ve seen on the subject and it’s priority did not illuminate much about the council, just highlighted current infighting.

  6. Given the overwhelming number of ex prosecutors who are now judges, the people of Massachusetts deserve to have more than one kind of person ( ex prosecutors) on the council that appoints judges. Most if not all judges are lawyers. Why not appoint someone once in a while who has both prosecution and defense experience?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.