|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
The 2025 session of the South Carolina General Assembly – which ends this Thursday (May 8, 2025) – has been notable for its lack of harmony as well as its lack of tangible accomplishment.
A superfluity of bickering and bloviating has boiled over beneath the copper dome of the S.C. State House since January, but precious little of consequence has been achieved on behalf of the citizens of the Palmetto State.
One critical item which has been totally ignored? Judicial selection reform…
A cause célèbre in 2024, lawmakers vowed to make major changes to their failed system – but came up way short on this issue. Not surprisingly, the fatal consequences of their inaction continues to be evident on our streets.
It has never been more important to hold lawmakers accountable for the way they choose judges – a corrupt process which has led to a near-total lack of accountability over bad actors in the judiciary (and which has turned South Carolina’s supposedly “independent” judicial branch into nothing but an annex of the omnipotent legislature).
***
This year, lawmakers have completely punted on any meaningful judicial selection reform – although this week legislation was filed which aims to address one of the many problems with the current system.
State senator Wes Climer – a longtime proponent of fixing our judicial branch – filed a bill last week which would amend the eligibility of retired judges to continue serving without being subjected to a review of their performance.
Climer’s legislation, S. 622, would require retired judges who wish to continue serving to appear before the S.C. Judicial Merit Selection Commission (SCJMSC) within two years of being tapped for extended service.
Climer’s legislation would also require retired judges to receive “a majority of the vote of the members of the General Assembly… approving (their) eligibility to serve.”
This is one of the reforms previously proposed by S.C. attorney general Alan Wilson, who penned a guest column on this media outlet back in February.
“We must ensure that all judges presiding over litigants in South Carolina are accountable to the people; however, we have retired judges that are not required to be reviewed and are not answerable to the people like full-time judges,” Wilson wrote.
***
RELATED | JUDICIAL HELLHOLES ARE BACK
***
Wilson took it a step further, arguing in favor of “a mandatory full retirement age” for judges as well as “term limits for retired judges serving in temporary roles.” Hopefully those reforms will soon make their way into proposed legislation, as well.
Climer and Wilson aren’t the only ones pushing on this issue. In addition to the Senate bill, we’re told legislation is also about to be introduced in the S.C. House related to these issues.
The clear focus of this push? Former S.C. chief justice Jean Toal, who continues to be tapped for high-profile civil and criminal cases despite repeatedly demonstrating a galling disregard for the law. Our audience is well aware of Toal’s flouting of the law with regard to the famous case of convicted killer Alex Murdaugh, but she’s doing it in other cases, too.
And the inability of anyone to rein her in is costing the Palmetto State…
With just three days left in the legislative session, it is highly unlikely Climer’s bill – or any meaningful judicial reform legislation – will clear the S.C. General Assembly in 2025. Still, the fact this proposal – and a potential House reform bill – are being introduced puts pressure on lawmakers to advance them during the 2026 session.
House members are going to have plenty of headaches as they prepare to face primary voters in the spring of next year. Is doing nothing to rein in the abuses of liberal activist judges like Toal really something they want on their record heading into those elections?
***
ABOUT THE AUTHOR…
Will Folks is the founding editor of the news outlet you are currently reading. Prior to founding FITSNews, he served as press secretary to the governor of South Carolina. He lives in the Midlands region of the state with his wife and eight children.
***
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.
6 comments
How about you and Alan Wilson list out some specifics? Instead of saying “liberal activist judges” name the specific judges you are talking about and tell us which rulings you are referring to. Tell us the retired judges besides Toal who are “flouting the law” and in which cases and through what rulings?
I can name a few more besides Toal. How about Kinlaw and Beatty , they have the combined IQ of a brick. Kinlaw makes up his own rules as he goes along and tries hard to give the most lenient sentences he can.
Thomas Hughston, a rouge that often times thumbed his nose at, in part, the Judicial Canons. Court reporters were well known to cover for him out of fear. One reporter quickly retired after receiving notice of the start of an appeal process. Audio recordings of a hearing where Hughston’s twisted and sick humored words before court staff, a very small number of attorneys with their client were on that audio recording made by the said court reporter. Court administration took possession of the reporters files
Shockingly, both the recording and steno records were illegally destroyed. The audio tape had other hearings on the same that took place before and after the fact But this hearing in particular was erased from that same tape. The destruction of these records after timely notice of appeal was given, clearly unlawful. Again, the hearing before and after this particular hearing where all records were destroyed, were both untouched and left intact. A reconstruction hearing had to be scheduled before Hughston before an appeal could move forward. During this hearing, Hughston, of course, was on his best behavior. But still he is not excused for his unacceptable conduct and his possible directive to destroy records when under notice of appeal.
Back then, nobody in the SC legal community dared point out what was going on inside a dirty system.
Josh appears to have all the appeal of a paper cut. No chance ever being a state judge.
I can only imagine how frustrating it must be when someone asks for proof of what you are saying.
This is a whole bunch of words. But I can’t find a single case you are referring to where there was an actual issue. Please tell us what you are talking about and give us a specific case and a specific judge who gave a ruling that wasn’t something that was appropriate. All the word salad is fine. But let’s talk about a real issue. What on earth are you talking about? Name one case where the ruling was against the law. Otherwise stop.