THE FAIR COURT PROJECT

Connecticut Judicial Connections

A source-linked map of judicial appointments, professional relationships, courthouse personnel and institutional finance.

Updated September 14, 2026 · Supreme, Appellate, Superior, civil and family courts

The strongest records concern actual commission service, dated former-employer overlap, specific rulemaking submissions, nomination endorsements and recorded appointment votes. Financial records establish particular business, contribution and grant relationships—not an unexplained single pool of money.

Assessment

These records identify who worked together, who participated in court policy, who publicly supported an appointment and how named officials voted. They do not establish coordinated rulings, purchased appointments, or Rosenwald/Soros payments to a Connecticut judge. A multi-step institutional path is not proof of case influence.

Featured connection: Jill Blomberg and Thomas D. Colin

Blomberg and Colin worked in the same family-law firm before his judgeship and again after his return to private practice. Her biography also credits her as co-editor, 2000–2005, of the family-law reference guide authored by Cynthia George and Colin. These are documented professional relationships, not an inference from a shared event.

The dated account separates Colin’s 2013–2018 judicial service, his announced April 2, 2018 return to the firm, and his later move to Siegel, Colin & Kaufman. It does not portray him as a current SGB attorney or sitting judge, or establish a case-specific conflict.

Read the Blomberg–Colin timeline and primary sources →

Principal findings

RecordDocumented connectionLimit
Appellate commission serviceSeptember 2018 minutes record James Sexton, William Bright and Ingrid Moll as present. Commission minutesActual co-service, not proof of private case coordination.
Employment and endorsementsBright’s Cummings & Lockwood tenure overlaps the SGB founders’ employment. Narwold’s 2025 nomination letter describes a former working relationship and continuing friendship. Sources and datesSeparate employment and endorsement records; no SGB appointment intervention established.
Public policy submissionsBlomberg’s 2018 limited-appearance proposal, a Sexton associate’s 2020 ethics-rule submission and Diana’s family-rule transmittals identify concrete participants and recipients. Submissions and recordsSubmission, committee approval and final adoption are different acts.
Appointment votesNomination-specific committee and floor records distinguish support, opposition, abstention and absence. Appointment analysisGeneral committee membership cannot substitute for an actual vote.
Historical recusal testimonyDowney’s 2007 Appellate nomination hearing identifies Schoonmaker III and records testimony about a firm-wide recusal arrangement. Hearing transcriptThe committee’s letter copy was unsigned; underlying case and original letter remain unverified. Testimony is not an independent misconduct finding.
Business and institutional financeSEC filings disclose Rosenwald entity ownership; first-party records document historical Soros-fund advisory work and particular Open Society/FCNY awards. Business records · Grant recordsApproved awards differ from payments; New York grants do not establish Connecticut earmarking or payments to judges.

Coverage

Research universeEntriesInterpretation
State judiciary299Includes all seven Supreme and nine Appellate members in the reconciled current lineup, plus Superior, senior, referee and magistrate entries with historical statuses.
All judges and adjudicators411State plus Probate, federal/circuit and executive-adjudicator entries. Not a current headcount.
Legislative/JSC/supplemental figures211All 187 listed legislators, nine named selection-commission members and fifteen supplemental public figures.
Courthouse personnel/professional listings1,104994 state-directory names and 110 federal/Probate additions, including all sixty listed Probate chief clerks. Employee/contractor and historical distinctions retained.

Every baseline judge, official and staff entry received an individual-name query. That is search coverage—not a complete investigation of each person’s clients, finances or communications. Categories overlap and should not be added as unique-person totals.

Detailed records

Reading the connections web

Roster links establish that a person appears in a specified directory. Event links connect each participant to the event, not to an assumed private relationship with every other participant. Historical testimony, first-party biographies, indexed-only material and unresolved leads retain different source-status labels. No relationship found is not a negative clearance.

Sources and remaining questions

The full report includes numbered source notes and a Sources section. Each public relationship record links to the underlying government, court, institutional or first-party record and carries its own limitation. Remaining questions include unrecovered underlying historical documents, complete appointment histories, fully reconciled contribution records, unlisted employees and five unresolved state-directory role matches. No confidential case files, private addresses, internal research notes or raw search receipts are published here.