Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
The much-maligned South Carolina Judicial Merit Selection Commission (JMSC) is beginning its annual process of screening candidates for judicial vacancies throughout the Palmetto State – the first time it has done so since the passage of watered-down “judicial reform” legislation earlier this year.
The deadline for citizens wishing to submit complaints regarding incumbent judges is rapidly approaching. Any citizen wishing to speak during the public hearing phase of the JMSC process – which begins on November 18, 2024 – must first file a notarized statement no later than 12:00 p.m. EDT on October 28, 2024.
For those of you unfamiliar with the JMSC, it is a ten-member panel controlled by powerful lawyer-legislators. The panel screens judges prior to submitting their names for legislative election – a process rife with corruption and insider deal-making.
And a process this media outlet has been calling out for years…
After years of debate and calls for lawmakers to amend the composition of this panel – and the rules by which it operates — compromise legislation (S. 1046) was signed into law on July 3, 2024 by governor Henry McMaster.
***
RELATED | GOVERNOR SIGNS BILL, CALLS FOR MORE ACTION
***
Although the governor signed the law, he sent a letter to Senate president Thomas Alexander reiterating concerns raised for years by this news outlet that political insiders use the JMSC to effectively rig judicial races.
South Carolina is one of only two states in America in which lawmakers picks judges – and the only state in which a legislatively controlled panel screens those choices ahead of time. As we have seen in far too many cases, lawyer-legislators exert untoward influence over this process – and then receive preferential treatment on behalf of their clients. As this news outlet has consistently noted, the current system has enabled institutional corruption, shredded the rights of victims, empowered violent criminals and materially eroded public safety.
It has also turned the judiciary into little more than a political annex of the legislature.
Given the GOP has supermajority control of both chambers, has his legislative stranglehold over the judiciary led to conservative appointments to the bench?
While the “reform” bill addressed some of the problems with the current selection process – raising the cap on the number of qualified candidates the panel could advance and setting term limits for members of the commission, for example – it left judicial selection squarely in the hands of lawmakers.
Also, the modest changes enacted by lawmakers do not take effect until July of 2025.
***
THE HEARINGS…
This year’s public public hearings will follow the same process as before the new legislation was signed into law. During the public hearings, interested individuals – including members of the public – may provide input, comments or testimonials regarding the candidates. After that, questions are asked of the candidates by the JMSC’s screening attorney. Finally, members of the panel can ask the candidates about any positive or negative themes uncovered during the screening process.
Unlike many legislative committee meetings, JMSC public hearings are not broadcast live – yet another issue with this secretive process. Transcripts of the hearings are made available to the public after the process is complete, however. In an effort to bring some transparency to the process, this media outlet attended some of the more controversial hearings last year — including that of former S.C. circuit court judge Bentley Price.
Notorious for his coziness with certain attorneys, Price has been linked to at least one looming inquiry involving judicial corruption in the Palmetto State. As our audience is well aware, he was also the poster judge for excessive judicial leniency for violent offenders – materially eroding public safety in the South Carolina Lowcountry.
Price was denied another term on the bench last year – one of the few judges held accountable by the process.
***
RELATED | EMBATTLED JUDGE DENIED ANOTHER TERM
***
Formal complaints filed against judges in the Palmetto State remain confidential – under the exclusive purview of the S.C. judicial branch – but the evidence, testimony and affidavits submitted to the JMSC eventually become part of the public record. That makes this the best (and often the only) avenue for individuals with valid concerns about a particular judge to provide information for public consumption.
Once the JMSC’s public hearings are complete, its members deliberate and evaluate each candidate – ostensibly weighing their qualifications and suitability for the judicial positions they are seeking. Based on these evaluations, the panel recommends a list of three candidates for each position deemed “highly qualified” to lawmakers. Lawmakers then review the recommendations and conduct their own evaluation, including additional interviews or hearings if needed. Eventually, they vote to confirm or reject the candidates. If confirmed, the candidate takes their seat on the bench.
Legislative elections are notorious for horse-trading, but the real maneuvering in these contests occurs during the screening process.
During these screening hearings, members of the commission record testimony of candidates on any matters revealed in the investigation. Again, for a member of the public to provide testimony regarding a candidate, they must submit a notarized statement by the October 28, 2024. For the complaint to be accepted by the commission, it must clearly state any allegations relating to the candidate’s character, competency or ethics.
Notarized statements should be sent via U.S. mail to:
South Carolina Judicial Merit Selection Committee
Attn: Erin B. Crawford, Esq.
104 Gressette Building
Post Office Box 142
Columbia, S.C. 29202
As we have in the past, count on this media outlet to attend as many of the upcoming hearings as we possibly can – providing as much public access to them as we possibly can. We would also encourage anyone who submits complaints to SCJMSC to copy our media outlet on those documents.
You can contact us by clicking here, or you can send a copy of your complaint via U.S. mail to:
FITSNews
Post Office Box 3642
Irmo, S.C. 29063
FITSNews has been leading the charge in the hopes of reforming this corrupt process. Unfortunately, lawmakers have steadfastly defended their failed system – and only paid lip service to long-overdue reforms.
***
2024 JMSC SCREENING SCHEDULE
(SCJMSC)
***
ABOUT THE AUTHOR …
Jenn Wood is FITSNews’ incomparable research director. She’s also the producer of the FITSFiles and Cheer Incorporated podcasts and leading expert on all things Murdaugh/ South Carolina justice. A former private investigator with a criminal justice degree, evildoers beware, Jenn Wood is far from your average journalist! A deep dive researcher with a passion for truth and a heart for victims, this mom of two is pretty much a superhero in FITSNews country. Did we mention she’s married to a rocket scientist? (Lucky guy!) Got a story idea or a tip for Jenn? Email her at jenn@fitsnews.com.
***
WANNA SOUND OFF?
Got something you’d like to say in response to one of our articles? Or an issue you’d like to address proactively? We have an open microphone policy! Submit your letter to the editor (or guest column) via email HERE. Got a tip for a story? CLICK HERE. Got a technical question or a glitch to report? CLICK HERE.
***
*****
2 comments
Please publish a transcript of the Bentley Price meeting FITS recorded. A follow up story on his current legal practice would be interesting. I bet he tells people he “retired” from the bench even though he was found not qualified as reported.
Several points deserve repeating here even though I have been writing them for years to no avail:
First, SC’s JMSC is NOT composed entirely of lawyer legislators. Of the ten, only 6 are legislators, the other 4 are from the community, including Pete Strom, a lawyer non-legislator, Andrew Saffran, a lawyer non-legislator, Lucy Gray, a lawyer non-legislator, and Ms. McGyver, a non-lawyer non-legislator.
Next, the real power behind the throne are the so-called “citizens’ committees” which are composed of lawyers non-legislator who serve for indefinite terms and without any supervision or professional input. They ended up giving clean bills of health to candidates known (or could have been known) to be suffering terminal cancer and who died in office within a year or two of election or re-election.
More points shall, God willing and FITS permitting, be added.