In New York, the Supreme Court is not the state’s highest court, but rather a district-level trial court; its judges are elected for 14-year terms, often without opposition. The highest tribunal in New York is the state Court of Appeals.

The lower court rulings that were voided by the justices on Wednesday had barred the New York State Board of Elections from using the judicial convention system, directing the board to hold primaries instead, until the State Legislature could set up a new selection system.

The high court’s rejection of those decrees was not a surprise, given that when the case was argued last Oct. 3, several justices voiced skepticism of the lower courts’ conclusions. The lower courts had ruled that picking State Supreme Court nominees by party convention violated the First Amendment right of political association by excluding not only the voters but also judicial candidates who are not anointed by party elders from the process. The high court found instead that the Constitution cut the other way, in favor of the state system.

“A political party has a First Amendment right to limit its membership as it wishes and to choose a candidate-selection process that will in its view produce the nominee who best represents its political platform,” Justice Scalia wrote.

He noted that nothing prevents people with judicial aspirations from wooing party leaders. Nor does anything compel the delegates chosen in party primaries in each assembly district to vote the way the party leaders desire, although they almost always do. Judicial aspirants are free to try to persuade the delegates to vote for them.