Opinion ID: 2060361
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: The Judiciary as a Suspect Class ( Maron Petitioners)

Text: The Maron petitioners are the only litigants in these appeals who have alleged that the Judiciary constitutes a suspect class that has been denied equal protection under the law because judicial pay raises have been historically contingent on or tied to salary increases for legislators. They also assert that the State defendants' rationale for refusing to increase judicial salaries fails to pass the strict scrutiny test or the less stringent rational basis test. For the reasons set forth in the Appellate Division order, we conclude that Supreme Court properly dismissed that cause of action ( see Maron, 58 AD3d at 123-124).
The Maron petitioners and the Larabee plaintiffs assert Compensation Clause causes of action that are premised on their claims that judicial salaries have been unconstitutionally diminished because of inflation. The Chief Judge plaintiffs posit an additional argument, asserting that the Legislature's act of freezing judicial salaries while increasing the salaries of 195,000 other state employees amounted to discrimination against the Judiciary.