What Does Bobby Harrell Have On The Judge Deciding His Fate?

House Ethics Committee has EXCLUSIVE jurisdiction. Legislature granted exclusive authority to the House Ethics Committee to hear such matters.

The cardinal rule of statutory construction is to ascertain and effectuate the intent of the legislature. Hodges v. Rainey, 341 S.C. 79, 85, 533 S.E.2d 578, 581 (2000).

“Where the statute’s language is plain and unambiguous, and conveys a clear and definite meaning, the rules of statutory interpretation are not needed and the court has no right to impose another meaning.” Id. (“Under the plain meaning rule, it is not the court’s place to change the meaning of a clear and unambiguous statute.”).

South Carolina circuit courts are vested with original jurisdiction in civil and criminal cases, except those cases in which exclusive jurisdiction shall be given to inferior courts, and shall have such appellate jurisdiction as provided by law. S.C. Const. art. V, § 11. “In determining whether the Legislature has given another entity exclusive jurisdiction over a case, a court must look to the relevant statute.”

Dema v. Tenet Physician Servs.-Hilton Head, Inc., 383 S.C. 115, 121, 678 S.E.2d 430, 433 (2009).

The Legislature has established a comprehensive statutory scheme for regulating the behavior of elected officials, public employees, lobbyists, and other individuals who present for public service. See generally S.C. Code Ann. §§ 2-17-5 to -150

S.C. Code Ann. §§ 8-13-100 to -1520. To enforce the State Ethics Act, the Legislature statutorily created the State Ethics Commission and the Senate and House Legislative Ethics Committees, respectively. See S.C. Code Ann. §§ 8-13-310 and -510.

Although the State Ethics Commission is generally responsible for the handling of ethical violations by most public officials and employees, the House and Senate Legislative Ethics Committees are charged with the exclusive responsibility for the handling of ethics complaints involving members of the General Assembly and their staff. See S.C. Code Ann. § 8-13-530 (noting the Ethics Committees are authorized to receive and hear complaints regarding ethical violations of members or staff of the appropriate house); S.C. Code Ann. § 8-13-320(9) (noting the Ethics
Commission is authorized to initiate or receive complaints and make investigations concerning public officials or public employees, except those concerning members or staff of the General Assembly). The respective Committees are authorized to receive, investigate, and hear all complaints alleging a violation of the State Ethics.

Finally, the South Carolina Constitution and this Court have expressly recognized and respected the Legislature’s authority over the conduct of its own members. See, e.g., Const. Art. 3, § 11 (stating each house has the authority to judge the election returns and qualifications of its own members); Const. Art. 3, § 12 (providing that each chamber shall determine its own rules of procedure, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and expel a member); see also Stone v. Leatherman, 343 S.C. 484, 541 S.E.2d 241 (2001) (finding court did not have jurisdiction over election result in light of Article 3, § 11 of the Constitution that provides the Senate has the authority to judge the election returns and qualifications of its own members); Scott v. Thorton, 234 S.C. 19, 106 S.E.2d 446 (1959) (finding the court had no jurisdiction in light of the constitutional provisions that require each house to judge the election returns and qualifications of its own members). Consequently, a court’s exercise of jurisdiction over Appellant’s ethical complaint against Governor Haley would not only contravene the clear language of the State Ethics Act, it would also violate separation of powers.6 See S.C. Const. art. I, § 8 (“In the government of this State, the legislative, executive, and judicial powers of the government shall be forever separate and distinct from each other, and no person or persons exercising the functions of one of said departments shall assume or discharge the duties of any other.”).

In sum, ethics investigations concerning members and staff of the Legislature are intended to be solely within the Legislature’s purview, to the exclusion of the courts.