🔒Lamont withdraws judicial nomination of former Rep. John Shaban

Gov. Ned Lamont informed the General Assembly on Monday he has withdrawn the judicial nomination of former state Rep. John Shaban, R-Redding, who was aggressively challenged in a public hearing last week about the details of a disorderly conduct charge arising from a domestic incident in 2019. Shaban, 61, who has been seeking a nomination as a judge of the Superior Court for a decade, was one of two politically connected nominees to face difficult questioning Thursday by the legislature’s Judiciary Committee. The other was Jeffrey Beckham, the governor’s former top fiscal adviser. As a result, the panel postponed until April 10 the votes that had been scheduled to take place at the conclusion of the public hearing Thursday on 14 nominations Lamont made March 26 to the Superior Court. The governor’s one-sentence letter about Shaban stated the nomination was withdrawn without offering a reason. Beckham, who faced sharp questioning over his lack of experience in court, intends to go forward for a vote by the Judiciary Committee, said Rob Blanchard, a spokesman for Lamont. Shaban had downplayed the incident involving his girlfriend, whom he described Thursday as his fiancée. In response to a question at the hearing, Shaban said there had been no similar incidents, and that he was accurate in asserting he had no criminal record. Rep. Craig Fishbein of Wallingford, the ranking House Republican on the committee, said Monday he had reason to believe that Shaban was untruthful in asserting there were no other incidents. Fishbein said since Thursday he has obtained incident reports from police in Redding about other conflicts between Shaban and his fiancée. None resulted in an arrest. Shaban could not be reached for comment. Natalie Braswell, the governor’s general counsel, said documents gathered as part of a background report produced by the State Police on nominees generally are confidential. But she said the report on Shaban stated “the individual had no criminal record.” Technically, the Judiciary Committee only recommends to the full General Assembly whether a nominee should be confirmed by the House and Senate. But the failure to win a recommendation typically ends a nominee’s chances of being confirmed. Governors have sole authority to nominate judges, choosing from a panel of candidates who have been approved by the Judicial Selection Commission. But the reality is that governors share a limited number of nominations with the legislative leaders of both parties. At Shaban’s request, House Minority Leader Vincent J. Candelora, R-North Branford, said Monday that he had recommended the former lawmaker several times during the administration of Lamont and his predecessor, Dannel P. Malloy. He was included in the most recent group of nominees for the first time. Shaban’s arrest on a misdemeanor disorderly conduct charge was a matter of public record, but the details were not. Shaban and the committee had jousted over whether incident constituted an arrest, as he was issued a written summons that Shaban likened to “a ticket.” He also resisted describing the resolution — prosecution was not pursued after what he called “counseling” — as the result of a court diversionary program. Shaban had a second problem raised in the hearing: His license to practice once had been suspended for more than a year in New York, and he had been subjected there to a private admonishment. The cause of the admonishment and suspension was the failure to renew a credential, Shaban said. Shaban practices law in Connecticut and New York. “You’d rather these things get caught in the vetting process, as opposed to getting flushed out at the public hearing,” Candelora said. Braswell said the vetting of judicial nominees is threefold: An examination by the Judicial Selection Commission and finding they are qualified to sit on the bench; a criminal background investigation by the State Police for the governor’s office; and, finally, questioning by the legislature. “The legislature also is supposed to do its own checks on this individual,” she said. “They are a separate branch of government.” The legislature does not have investigative staff, but relies on questionnaires, public and private interviews with candidates, and testimony at public hearings to render its verdict on fitness to become a judge. Sen. Gary Winfield, D-New Haven, co-chair of Judiciary, declined to comment in detail on how Shaban and Beckham were likely to fare. Democrats and Republicans on the committee met privately in caucuses Thursday after the hearings. “Coming out of our caucus, he did not look to have what would be the requisite number of votes,” Winfield said of Shaban. “But we did not talk to every member, obviously.” He declined to say what, if anything, the committee had shared with the governor’s office about the prospects of Shaban and Beckham being recommended for confirmation. Generally, he said, the committee shares its assessment and will “leave to the governor and the candidate what happens next.” Beckham, 62, is a career state employee in the legislative and executive branches, most recently as Lamont’s top fiscal adviser as the secretary of the Office of Policy and Management. He last practiced law in a courtroom in 1990, when he was a junior associate, before being hired for a legal job in the legislature. There is no requirement by statute for a nominee to have trial experience. Candelora said Beckham, as the budget director for a governor who frequently denied Democratic requests for higher spending, was paying a price for his previous job. “Clearly, Democrats clearly had an ax to grind,” Candelora said. Fishbein also had challenged another nominee, Felice Gray-Kemp, 57, of Hamden, as having no experience in courts. She is a former corporate lawyer who previously worked for United Technologies, Amphenol Corporation and Chemtura Corporation.