A Superior Court judge has ruled that K. Joseph Shekarchi, the former Rhode Island House speaker, may continue his bid for a seat on the state Supreme Court, finding no constitutional bar to a lawmaker applying for the bench despite an ethics complaint alleging a violation of the state's revolving-door statute.
Judicial path cleared
Judge Richard Licht wrote Monday in a 29-page decision that Shekarchi’s application to the Judicial Nominating Commission does not run afoul of the law that restricts certain post-legislative state employment for one year after leaving office. The ruling comes one day before the commission planned to interview Shekarchi and four other candidates vying to fill the vacancy left when Justice Maureen McKenna Goldberg retired in March.
“Mr. Shekarchi, as an elected member of the House of Representatives, was permitted to apply to the JNC,” Licht wrote. “If nominated and confirmed, he may serve in the position.”
“The clear and unambiguous rule of law won today,” Shekarchi said in a statement Monday. “As a practicing attorney for more than 30 years, I always had full confidence in the judicial system and am grateful for today's court decision reaffirming that elected officials may be considered for appointment to the Rhode Island Supreme Court.”
Who’s on the short list
Shekarchi is among five candidates scheduled for interviews with the Judicial Nominating Commission on Tuesday. The panel will question candidates before sending a slate of nominees to the governor, who makes the final appointment subject to Senate confirmation.
- K. Joseph Shekarchi — former House speaker, Warwick Democrat.
- Luis Matos — Rhode Island Superior Court judge.
- Christopher Bush — assistant attorney general.
- Laureen D'Ambra — Family Court judge.
- John E. Roberts — partner at Proskauer Rose LLC, based in Boston.
Complaint and legal contest
The legal challenge was filed to the state Ethics Commission by Michael Yelnosky, a professor at Roger Williams University School of Law, after Shekarchi applied for the Supreme Court vacancy and stepped down as House speaker on May 7. Yelnosky argued that moving directly from the legislature into a state judicial appointment would violate the revolving-door prohibition enacted in 1992.
That law generally bars sitting legislators from seeking or accepting employment with state government agencies for at least one year following the end of their elected service. Licht, however, concluded the statute does not constitutionally prevent a lawmaker from applying for a judicial post under the circumstances presented.
Background and precedents
Licht noted his own experience seeking and receiving an advisory opinion from the state Ethics Commission before accepting his Superior Court seat in 2014. The judge’s analysis focused on statutory interpretation and the limits of the revolving-door restriction when applied to constitutional appointments to the judiciary.
The decision does not appoint Shekarchi to the court; it simply removes the legal impediment to his candidacy and allows the Judicial Nominating Commission to proceed with interviews and evaluations. Any nomination from the commission would still have to be acted on by the governor and confirmed by the state Senate.
What happens next
The Judicial Nominating Commission’s interviews are scheduled for Tuesday afternoon. From there, the commission will forward a list of recommended nominees to the governor. The governor’s selection then goes to the Senate for confirmation — a process that can include public hearings and debate.
| Step | Who | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| Interviews | Judicial Nominating Commission | Evaluate candidates; select nominees |
| Appointment | Governor | Choose nominee from commission's list |
| Confirmation | State Senate | Provide advice and consent |
The ruling and the impending commission interviews place the state’s judicial selection process back on a familiar track — albeit one that may invite political scrutiny, especially given Shekarchi’s recent role as House speaker. The revolving-door law was designed to prevent conflicts of interest; Licht’s opinion narrows how that law applies when elected officials seek judicial office.
For now, the matter moves from the courthouse to the confidential chambers of the Judicial Nominating Commission, where legal resumes and courtroom experience will be weighed against public expectations for impartiality and independence on the state’s highest bench. One way or another, Rhode Islanders will soon learn whether the former speaker’s leap to the judiciary is a short hop or a long jump.
