SC Lawmakers Pose “Judge Swap”

CONSERVATIVE STATE SENATOR BACKS BRUCE WILLIAMS, URGES JOHN FEW TO RUN IN 2017 … We knew it wouldn’t be long before the deal-making got underway in this year’s race for the S.C. Supreme Court – we just didn’t know the deal might be something we could live with. The operative…


We knew it wouldn’t be long before the deal-making got underway in this year’s race for the S.C. Supreme Court – we just didn’t know the deal might be something we could live with.

The operative term being might be …

As we’ve noted in our coverage of the current race, the consensus is that of the three candidates John Few – chief judge of the S.C. court of appeals – is the most likely to confine his opinions within the scope of the law.  Which we like.  Does that mean Few is the most “conservative” judge, though?

Not necessarily …

As we noted in this article from April of 2009, Bruce Williams – another appeals court judge who is running for the seat – was long-regarded by lawmakers as more conservative than Few.

And still is, according to many legislators …

In fact, our 2009 column referred to Few as one of several “less-than-conservative” options compared to Williams, although Few appears to have tacked considerably to the right in recent years … and is now generally regarded as a conservative judge (in addition to being a strict constructionist).

So … what should lawmakers do?

One GOP Senator – Katrina Shealy – has an intriguing idea, one based on the fact that there will be another Supreme Court race next year.

“If we want two conservative judges – and I think we Republicans are in a position where we absolutely have to appoint two conservative judges – we should elect Williams this year and then let Few run next year,” she said.

Shealy’s logic is that Williams’ term on the appellate court is nearly up – whereas Few’s term still has several years remaining.

“Few ought to be running next year,” she said.

Shealy told us several House members had independently discussed precisely such a plan – and that legislative leaders in both chambers were “warming” to the notion.  Few’s supporters – eager not to lose momentum – conceded Williams would be a “good conservative judge,” but countered that their candidate had more early commitments.

“Why should Judge Few have to wait a year if he is winning?” one asked.

Hmmm …

“This will be Williams only opportunity,” one of the judge’s supporters told us.  “Williams been on bench longer – Few should withdraw and run next time.”

After electing (and reelecting) multiple liberal justices to the Supreme Court in recent years, lawmakers are under intense pressure to start shifting the ideological balance of the court further to the right – especially in the aftermath of a contentious school funding lawsuit in which the court overstepped its authority.

Will they do so?  Twice?

Of interest?  Few and Williams aren’t the only judges in the mix this year.  A legislatively-dominated screening committee also approved Ralph King “Tripp” Anderson – the chief judge of the S.C. administrative law court – as a candidate.  Anderson’s bid for the bench is being aggressively promoted by liberal S.C. Senate President Hugh Leatherman – which as far as we’re concerned rules him out of consideration.

As we’ve said for years, the fact lawmakers are involved in this process to begin with is wrong.  Judges should be appointed by the executive branch with the advise and consent of the legislature – or popularly elected.

Either way is fine with us … as long as lawmakers extricate themselves from the process.


Related posts


S.C. Attorney General Leads Parental Rights Coalition

Erin Parrott

South Carolina Attorney General Addresses Title IX Changes


It’s Getting Hot In South Carolina

Will Folks


Marriage=Less blowjobs January 20, 2016 at 3:21 pm

A judge swap is like a wife swap except there’s more screwing going on.

9" January 20, 2016 at 3:39 pm

wife-swapping is a good way to meet guys;are the judges cute

Lone Ranger January 20, 2016 at 3:56 pm

And when FITS was asked about the “ethics” of Katrina’s being elected to serve VOTERS and then voting to rip down patriots’ flag WITHOUT their vote

Will and his lemmings said…well uh…the thing is…ah we’d ALSO lie to advance oursel…uh…gosh…guess cons ARE taking good notes !!!

Dean January 20, 2016 at 4:53 pm

When did the people vote to put the flag up originally?

Lone Ranger January 20, 2016 at 5:10 pm

Dean kept failing Remedial History and of ignorance thought…well gawush I guess that nothing could be finer
He was an ingrate like Haley and Joe Wilson about patriots and didn’t know the Civil War started in South Carolina !!!

tomstickler January 20, 2016 at 6:12 pm

You failed to answer Dean’s question, so I will give you a hint: the people did not vote to put it up originally, but it was done by the Legislature as a “middle finger” to the Civil Rights movement.

Lone Ranger January 20, 2016 at 6:17 pm

tomstickler was proud to be an ACORN member and bashed patriots with I-Lie-Joe Wilson and Haley
You can find him down at the SNAP and Section 8 offices asking YOU to bail the grifter out daily !!!

HD January 20, 2016 at 6:36 pm

I know, I know! Never. Same answer to the question: “When did the Governor take down the flag?” It was taken down by the same entity that put it up – the Legislature. The Lone Ranger isn’t bright enough to appreciate the finer points of government.

Everybody January 20, 2016 at 6:40 pm

Lone Ranger is a complete moron living in a dream world.

jimlewisowb January 20, 2016 at 4:13 pm

Two couples had gone away for the weekend. The two guys, John and Bruce, have decided to try to persuade their wives to do a bit of partner swapping for the night. After several drinks that night they succeed.

John knows it’s that time of the month for his wife and the thought of Bruce not knowing this makes him smile. The guys agreed that when they sit around the breakfast table the following morning, they will tap their teaspoons on the side of their coffee mug the number of times that they did it with each other’s wives.

The next morning they are all at the breakfast table, slightly hung over and quite uncomfortable, when John proudly taps his teaspoon 3 times against his coffee mug.

After a brief moment of thinking, Bruce takes his teaspoon and taps it once on the strawberry jam and 3 times on the peanut butter!

Go ahead and swap you dumbass cockroaches, both of you will get fucked

Dorisshenderson2 January 21, 2016 at 6:09 am

2?my neighbor’s mate is getting 98$. HOURLY on the internet?….A few days ago new McLaren F1 subsequent after earning 18,512$,,,this was my previous month’s paycheck ,and-a little over, 17k$ Last month ..3-5 h/r of work a day ..with extra open doors & weekly paychecks.. it’s realy the easiest work I have ever Do. I Joined This 7 months ago and now making over 87$, p/h.Learn More right Here
??? http://GlobalSuperEmploymentVacanciesReportsMoney/GetPaid/98$hourly?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?..

tomstickler January 20, 2016 at 4:13 pm

It is interesting that the “ethical dilemma” here is represented as choosing between “most likely to confine his opinions within the scope of the law” and “generally regarded as a conservative judge”….

What to do? What to DO!?

Victorious Secret January 20, 2016 at 5:14 pm

“Judges should be . . . – or popularly elected.”

Um, Nope.

erneba January 20, 2016 at 7:15 pm

Got to get these judge appointments out of the legislative body. There just too much room in that assembly for for “wheeling and dealing,” and it usually involves payoffs, paybacks, and/or something unscrupulous.
Having judges popularly elected would ensure that the executive or legislative branch could sell or trade favors.
I am also leaning towards setting a term of service at four, six, maybe eight years before they have to go back to be re-elected.

Kev January 20, 2016 at 7:22 pm

Please, someone , tell me what Katrina Shealy has accomplished? DSS is still a mess. She moans and groans, lobbies religiously for those piss-ant awards she is always receiving, and then accomplishes nothing.

Why do we care what Katrina Shealy does?

Nunc Pro Tunc January 20, 2016 at 8:22 pm

Change is brewing just over the horizon. All could get screwed and end up indicted for federal crimes.

Doris January 22, 2016 at 10:24 am

Not so long as Bill Nettles is in office. Ex-Daddy in Law Alex got him protected by ole Toal.

Marvin Straight January 21, 2016 at 12:59 pm

Waiting one year would give Few a little extra and much needed time to kick his binge drinking habit.


Leave a Comment