By: Christopher Shea – January 28, 2026
A former Senate majority leader who opposed same-sex marriage is advancing toward a lifetime appointment as a member of the Rhode Island Judiciary, despite advocates’ objections.
The Senate Committee on Judiciary voted 13-1 Wednesday to advance Gov. Dan McKee’s nomination of Michael McCaffrey to fill a District Court vacancy to the full chamber for confirmation. The committee also gave its unanimous approval for McKee’s three other picks to fill judicial vacancies on the Superior and Family courts.
“Whether in this building or in my practice of law or in the community, I have worked with individuals navigating difficult situations and I have worked to help them overcome them,” McCaffrey, a Warwick Democrat, told the committee during his introductory remarks. “It’s the culmination of these experiences that I believe make me qualified as a justice of the District Court.”
If confirmed, McCaffrey would fill the seat left vacant by Melissa R. DuBose, who now serves as a judge for the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island. The annual base salary for a state District Court judge is $199,075.
Also moving toward a full Senate vote: Assistant Attorney General Shannon Signore, who McKee nominated to fill a vacancy on the Providence County Superior Court. Magistrates Andrea Iannazzi and Alberto Aponte Cardona Sr. were picked to fill two Family Court vacancies.
McCaffrey served in the Rhode Island Senate from 1995 through the end of the 2022 legislative session, including as majority leader from 2017 until his final term concluded.
Colleagues on the panel praised his work and fair demeanor, as did Rhode Island Supreme Court Justice Erin Lynch Prata — herself a onetime senator who noted the two didn’t always agree on policy.
“There was always a tremendous amount of respect,” she said. “Our disagreements were confined to the policy, they never devolved to personal attacks.”
Lynch Prata also pointed to McCaffrey’s legislative record in helping shape today’s court network, including laws that created a drug court, a mental health treatment calendar, and mandates fora more diverse judiciary.
“The legislation that he is responsible for passing not only made Rhode Island safer and more responsive to Rhode Islanders’ needs, but also set Rhode Island courts on a path our neighboring New England states are striving to catch up to,” she said.
But McCaffrey’s Senate record has also drawn plenty of criticism from progressive groups like the Womxn Project, which took to social media last July to oppose his appointment before his initial interview before the Judicial Nomination Commission.
A conservative member of his party, McCaffrey was part of the leadership team that allowed a vote on codifying abortion-rights to go to the floor in 2019. He voted against the measure that ultimately passed.
He was also among 12 senators who voted no when the chamber passed the bill to legalize same-sex marriage in 2013.
“It’s a lifetime appointment that’s going to impact so many people’s lives,” Jocelyn Foye, the Womxn Project’s director and co-founder, said in an interview before the committee meeting. “And he’s not a good representative of all of the people.”
The Wakefield-based organization issued another call to action Monday, urging the public to contact McKee and Senate President Valarie Lawson to halt McCaffery’s nomination from going forward.
Lawson appeared on the panel in her ex-officio role, approving McCaffery’s advancement. She has previously stated that McCaffrey had the “highest integrity” and a deep knowledge of the law.
At his interview before the Judicial Nominating Commission last July, McCaffrey said his understanding of such social issues has “evolved.” He said he would be an impartial jurist if appointed — a message he reiterated before lawmakers Wednesday.
“I have always treated everyone with dignity and respect both in and out of public service,” he said. “If appointed, I will continue to ensure that every person who enters my courtroom remains seen, heard, and treated equally under the law.”
Foye remained skeptical. She pointed to an op-ed in the Boston Globe penned by former Sen. Gayle Goldin, a Providence Democrat, who claimed the former majority leader has gone back on his word before.
“That’s a character picture,” Foye said. “He claims he’s changed, but that’s so hard to believe considering how long he had worked in the Senate against so many organizations during his period of time there.”
It’s a similar concern shared by Sen. Dawn Euer, a Newport Democrat who cast the lone vote against McCaffrey’s advancement.
Euer was deputy director for the successful campaign to legalize same-sex marriage in 2013. With LGTBQ+ rights under the crosshairs of the Trump administration, she said it’s “critically important” that the District Court vacancy is filled by someone with a record of protecting civil liberties.
“I think it’s possible he evolved, but I don’t think based on words we should be awarding a lifetime appointment,” she said in an interview. “If someone evolves in one direction, can they evolve in another?”
Other committee members praised McCaffery’s character. Sen. Mark McKenney, a Warwick Democrat, noted that while the governor’s judicial pick may have been against certain policy issues, he did allow them to go to the Senate floor for robust discussion.
“That’s very indicative of someone who understands that it’s not all about personal views,” McKenney said.
McCaffrey, along with McKee’s other judicial appointees, will be considered for confirmation by the full Senate some time next week, chamber spokesperson Greg Paré said.
Sen. Dawn Euer, a Newport Democrat who cast the only no vote on advancing the nomination of Michael McCaffrey to the full Senate for a floor vote, expanded on her vote in a statement issued Thursday morning:
“The ground has shifted underneath us in many ways as the federal administration has continued to undermine the rule of law and civil rights. States, and therefore state courts, are more important than ever and it is critical that we are making merit based (not patronage based) judicial selections that will strengthen our state judiciary during these tumultuous times.
I’ve been in the General Assembly since 2017, and been working on high profile issues much longer than that. I’ve been an advocate for reproductive rights, marriage equality, and gun safety among other things and have first-hand knowledge of how those pieces of legislation passed. Not the least of which was marriage equality passing after a historic electoral campaign in 2012, in which many anti-gay incumbents lost their seats. McCaffrey himself almost lost reelection that year.
I’m dismayed by the attempt to rewrite history by some of my colleagues regarding former Senator McCaffrey’s role on many of those issues and bills. Facts matter and to twist recent history to try to place him at the center of why some historic legislation such as marriage equality or the reproductive privacy rights act passed is not only incorrect, it’s offensive. It’s also a framework and explanation that advances an authoritarian view of the world instead of a democratic one which I wholly reject.
Much of the discussed high profile legislation discussed passed because of collective action of many people both inside and outside of the building who wouldn’t take no for an answer after years of legislation being blocked and/or undermined with poison pill amendments. These historic bills didn’t pass because of former Senator McCaffrey, they passed because he could no longer block them.
I’d also like to add that the narrative centering him as the reason these bills passed contradict his own testimony and explanation on these issues to which he said he had “evolved” and that we should consider his opinions and actions with the times. As far as his evolution, we are fortunate that journalist Steve Ahlquist was at the Judicial Nominating Conference hearing and recorded the meeting. People should watch his explanation for themselves and come to their own conclusions. These are lifetime appointments and the stakes are high.
This recent round of nominations has highlighted many flaws in our judicial nominating process and shows that the reforms of the ’90s have been all but erased at this point. I plan on working with advocates and my colleagues to introduce legislation to further reform this process.”
