NIAGARA FALLS (TNS) — There is general agreement that New York state needs to expand the number of Supreme Court justices to tackle a mammoth backlog in the aftermath of the pandemic that has forced litigants to wait in some cases years to resolve cases involving commercial, marital, malpractice, criminal and a myriad of other matters that come before the courts.

There are proposals in the state Legislature to try and do just that. But this is a case where the seemingly “easy fix” is not so simple when you take a closer look.

Justices of the New York state Supreme Court are constitutional officers, and the state Constitution mandates the establishment of one Supreme Court for each 50,000 residents in each of the state’s 13 judicial districts.

Two lawmakers — state Sen. Brad Hoylman-Sigal and Assemblyman Alex Bores, both Manhattan Democrats — have sponsored a constitutional amendment simply removing that population metric as a factor in adding Supreme Court seats.

That would leave the decision over where to assign newly created seats up to the Legislature and the governor, where we are concerned that decision would become part of the horse-trading that is a standard feature of those overtly political branches of government.

That proposed amendment passed in the last session of the Legislature, and if approved this session as well, would go to the people for an up-or-down vote in the 2026 general election.We agree with their motivation to create additional seats, but we think there is a better way to get there.

There is an alternative proposal, sponsored by Assemblyman Jeffrey Dinowitz, D-Bronx, and Sen. Leroy Comrie, D-Queens, that would retain the population metric but lower it to 30,000 per judicial district. That would authorize creation of 266 addition Supreme Court justice seats statewide, and assure they are assigned where the population and caseload demand them.

This is not a partisan issue. It is a geographic one, affecting districts whether Democrats or Republicans are the dominant party. Supreme Court seats, as defined in the state Constitution, are district- and population-based, just as legislative seats are, and maintaining that population metric would ensure that all parts of the state are treated equally.

The Association of Justices for the Supreme Court of the State of New York, the Supreme Court Justices Association of the City of New York, the Latino Judges Association and the Judicial Friends Association have urged support for the Dinowitz/Comrie alternative. It is concerning that the proposal to simply remove the population metric was developed without discussion with the affected Supreme Court justices.

While the state Senate Judiciary Committee has sent the proposed amendment to the full Senate, Assembly members appear to be taking a second look at the alternative, which would maintain a population metric. That would increase the number of justices statewide, while protecting judicial independence and the separation of powers.

We think that makes more sense.

(New York Supreme Court Justice Frank Caruso of Niagara Falls is president of the Association of Justices of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.)