A federal appeals court yesterday put added pressure on Albany lawmakers to scrap the 85-year-old system used to select New York’s trial judges. The ruling, which affirms a lower court’s decision, said candidates for state judgeship will be nominated in general primary elections beginning in 2007, unless the Legislature acts.

Currently, the Democratic and Republican parties pick their judicial candidates in nominating conventions that opponents say give party bosses the power to single-handedly pick judges. In yesterday’s 82-page decision, a panel for the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said a lower court judge had acted within the limits of his discretion when the judge, John Gleeson of U.S. District Court in Brooklyn, said the system unconstitutionally denied party outsiders a chance at the nomination.

Since Judge Gleeson issued his ruling in January of this year, the legal community has seized on the opportunity to encourage the Legislature to either change the rules of the convention system or do away with it in favor of primaries.

The Legislature did not act on the issue this year. In the absence of new legislation, Judge Gleeson ruled that the parties are to hold primaries beginning next year. Some lawyers say the issue is pressing because primaries would require judges to turn to lawyers to raise money for pricey campaigns.

Yesterday, political observers questioned whether the Legislature would take the issue up when it returns.

The district attorney for Brooklyn, Charles Hynes, who has investigated whether party bosses were selling judgeships, said in a statement via e-mail, “I would hope that the New York State legislature will move swiftly to end forever the Convention system which has for too long disenfranchised the voters in this state of their right to freely elect Judges.”

Lawyers for the plaintiffs said the state judiciary, which has been roiled with allegations of corruption in Brooklyn in recent years, would benefit by yesterday’s decision.

“The ruling is not only a victory for voters, but also for previously excluded candidates, and will strengthen New York’s judiciary,” said attorney Jeremy Creelan in a statement sent via e-mail. “Under the current system, judges are beholden to party leaders and many well-qualified lawyers are never even considered for judgeships because they have no ties to party leaders. Allowing all well-qualified candidates to compete for their party’s nomination will help restore confidence in our courts.”

A lawyer representing two associations of state judges listed as defendants, Joseph Forstadt, did not rule out the possibility of an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, which, he said, has been sympathetic to the constitutionality of convention systems in the past. Mr. Forstadt also said that the defendants could request a trial before Judge Gleeson, who issued his ruling on a request for preliminary injunction.

The case was called Lopez-Torres v. New York State Board of Elections, after Margarita Lopez-Torres, a civil court judge who challenged the system.

The three federal judges who ruled yesterday were Chester Straub, Sonia Sotomayor, and Peter Hall.