Short Take: Canceling Rory

Like it or not, the endorsement of the New York Times is a big deal for politics in general, and New York City in particular. And the Times gave its endorsement for District Attorney of Queens County.

The choice is difficult. The field of candidates is big but disappointing. Tiffany Cabán, a 31-year-old public defender, is the best pick.

Ms. Cabán does not have the managerial experience of Melinda Katz, the Queens borough president, or the prosecutorial experience of Greg Lasak, a retired judge and former longtime assistant Queens district attorney. But Ms. Katz has no experience as a prosecutor nor long commitment to criminal justice reform, and despite Mr. Lasak’s tenure, he would not seem to be someone to bring change to an office where he served for years.

What does Cabán bring to the race?

Unlike those two candidates, Ms. Cabán would come into office unencumbered by ties to the borough power structure and free to pursue her commitment to serve the community by doing more than just winning convictions. Her seven years as a public defender have given her insight into how the system works, and how it ought to be changed.

She has no prosecutorial experience. She’s never managed staff, no less an office. But there’s more:

Ms. Cabán identifies as a queer Latina.* She is of Puerto Rican descent and is the first in her family to graduate from college. She would bring a perspective suited to one of the world’s most diverse communities, one where elected officials have rarely reflected that reality.

She’s a graduate of New York Law School, admitted to practice in 2013 and a staff attorney at New York County Defender Services, formerly with the Legal Aid Society. She’s earnest and passionate, and presumably an excellent lawyer. Yet, the Queens County Bar Association found her, and her alone, unqualified for the position.

Maybe the QCBA hates this progressive upstart, who hasn’t paid her dues to the lawyers who run the joint, and they spanked her with this rating. Maybe her lack of experience, either in prosecution or management, is exactly what Queens County needs if it’s to have “transformational change.” Maybe she’s the candidate who can undo the damage “Get Down” Brown did in skirting the constitutional rights of defendants for decades to achieve convictions.

Maybe not. Whoever wins the Democratic primary will become the next District Attorney of Queens, because this is New York and that’s how things work. And the Times endorsement certainly takes a person who demonstrates none of the ordinary qualifications for the office of prosecutor and elevates her over others who appear well qualified. Maybe she is.

But what’s singularly bizarre about this endorsement isn’t what’s said, but what’s not. Where is Rory Lancman? There is no mention, none, of his name in the endorsement. It’s as if he doesn’t exist. He’s a New York City councilman, a steadfast progressive and a candidate for Queens DA. He’s worked hard to establish his progressive bona fides, whether that’s your thing or not. And yet his name appears nowhere in the Times endorsement and review of Cabán’s competition.

This isn’t to endorse Lancman’s candidacy, or to challenge Cabán’s. This is to question what’s going on at the Times. Its endorsement of a candidate who has none of the competencies usually expected of a District Attorney is surprising, but not too much given the political climate and tendency to substitute passion for ability. Most lawyers would have reservations about letting a sixth-year lawyer try a case alone, no less become District Attorney, but that may just be old-man bias.

But the omission of Rory Lancman can’t be so easily ignored. He’s clearly not “awful,” in the sense that the Times felt compelled to “cancel” his existence by never uttering his name. He’s done his time in the city council, championed progressive causes with perhaps more zeal than one would prefer and earned the right to at least a passing mention by the New York Times.

What did Lancman do to deserve to be erased by the Times? Inquiring minds want to know.

*When questioned as to the propriety of raising her “identification,” as if voting for a “queer Latina” made any more sense than refusing to vote for a “queer Latina,” the response was that people could presume her racial and sexual orientation identities to reflect her ideology.

While this simplistic assumption was proven fallacious by the election of Bronx District Attorney Darcel Clark, the return to race, gender and other characteristics as arguments to vote for, or against, a candidate rather than qualifications or positions bodes extremely poorly for the future. If it’s an acceptable argument that people should vote for the “queer Latina,” it’s acceptable to argue to vote against her, or to vote for the “straight white man,” or the Jewish guy named Lancman.

 

20 thoughts on “Short Take: Canceling Rory

  1. B. McLeod

    It is hardly a secret that LGBTQ is the “progressive” fad du jour. So of course she goes to the head of the pack for the endorsement.

    Reply
    1. SHG Post author

      But what if it turns out that, “queer Latina” though she be, she’s ineffective as DA and, worse still, fails to achieve both reform or community safety. Is identity a sufficient substitute for the effective performance of a function?

      Reply
      1. Jeff

        It’s no different than wanting a certain subset of a group (senate / bench / what have you) to be female. I’ve always said I don’t care what’s between their legs any more than I care about skin tone. The whole House can be full of queer latinas as long as they’re most qualified for the job. Apparently that makes me a bigot, because equal outcomes, or something.

        The captcha was tractors, today. You did this on purpose, didn’t you?

        Reply
      2. B. McLeod

        For the NYT? I’m gonna say that’s a “Hell, Yes” right there. None of that other stuff holds a candle to promoting LGBTQ lifestyles.

        Reply
      3. Pedantic Grammar Police

        Sufficient substitute? Don’t be ridiculous! It’s the only thing that matters.

        Only an old white man would wonder why a white man, regardless of his qualifications, is not worth mentioning.

        Reply
  2. Pedantic Grammar Police

    I looked at Rory’s website and I see that he tried to mitigate his toxic whiteness by surrounding himself with black guys. It’s no use Rory.

    He might get a few votes from old white guys; the rest of us are required to vote for the most marginalized identity, if we don’t want to be racist misogynists.

    Reply
    1. LocoYokel

      Given the promotion certain of these groups are I would argue the use of the adjective “marginalized” anymore.

      Reply
  3. jm ryan

    What did THE OTHER CANDIDATES do to deserve to be erased by the Simple Justice? Inquiring minds want to know.
    (
    Jose Nieves
    Mina Malik
    Betty Lugo
    )

    Reply
    1. SHG Post author

      That’s a good question. I considered including them all, but decided that the point was better made by singling out Lancman. That may not have been the right call, but it’s the call I made.

      Reply
      1. Jim Ryan

        It seems you are prophetic, Rory has cancelled himself!
        I kinda sorta just knew you were one up on Miss Cleo.

        Reply
    1. SHG Post author

      I know I was a brilliant lawyer six years in. It wasn’t until ten years that I realized how much I had to learn.

      Reply
      1. MonitorsMost

        If I were to run for a judicial position or something similar, my campaign slogan would be something to the effect of “There are more qualified people out there, but they aren’t running. I’ve seen the legal ability of the other candidates and it’s shit. I wouldn’t want them deciding my fate and neither should you.”

        Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments are subject to editing or deletion if I deem them inappropriate for any reason or no reason. Hyperlinks are not permitted in comments and will be deleted. References to Nazis/Hitler will not be tolerated. I allow anonymous comments, but will not tolerate attacks unless you use your real name. Anyone using the phrase "ad hominem" incorrectly will be ridiculed. If you use ALL CAPS for emphasis, I will assume you wear a tin foil hat and treat you accordingly. I expect civility from you, but that does not mean I will respond in kind. This is my home and I make the rules. If you don't like my rules, then don't comment. Spam is absolutely prohibited, and you will be permanently banned.