|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Embattled South Carolina state representative Chris Murphy has been sued for divorce by his wife, S.C. circuit court judge (and former S.C. supreme court candidate) Maite Murphy.
Chris Murphy – former chairman of the powerful House judiciary committee – was hit with the paperwork from his estranged wife one week after FITSNews exclusively reported on his latest issues with alleged alcohol abuse. The 56-year-old lawyer from North Charleston missed numerous weeks of the 2025 legislative session dealing with his alleged addiction – which would be the second time he has confronted this particular demon in the last three years.
Regular members of our audience will recall Murphy entered a treatment facility in the summer of 2022 after undisclosed illnesses sidelined him for much of the session that year. At the time he entered treatment, he was attempting to install his wife as a justice on the S.C. supreme court.
***
What is the status of the Murphys’ divorce?
It’s unclear. All we know for certain is Maite Murphy filed her pleading on April 14, 2025 – a little over a month ago – and a hearing in the matter was scheduled at 10:00 a.m. EDT this Thursday (May 22, 2025). Pleadings and motions related to the case were not immediately available, and calls to attorneys were not immediately returned.
Here is a report from conservative activist Lynz Piper-Loomis, who spoke briefly with our founding editor Will Folks earlier today prior to traveling to the Dorchester County courthouse…
***
Exclusive Breaking News! #SCPol #BreakingNews @TheWillFolks @fitsnews @SCHouseGOP @SCFreedomCaucus @scsenategop @ChrisMurphySC98 @murrellsmith @schousespeaker @MyrtleBeachesSC @NationalFile @Jscottpace @AprilCromerSC @LizCrokin @annvandersteel https://t.co/HDZlNHbeHe
— Lynz Piper-Loomis (@LynzPiperLoomis) May 22, 2025
***
If Loomis is correct that the files linked to the Murphys’ divorce have been sealed, it would constitute one of the few instances in which FITSNews reserves the right to step in and report on the personal lives of public officials.
This news outlet detests the opacity and subjectivity associated with sealing case files in South Carolina – as we have noted on numerous previous occasions.
“The sealing of public records for influential individuals is standard operating procedure in South Carolina … yet another example of the preferential treatment received by those in power (or those with proximity to power) in the Palmetto State,” we wrote in this 2020 post. “It works like this: When normal people screw up … everybody gets to read about their dirty laundry. When those with ‘connections’ screw up, the sordid details of their dirty deeds are kept under lock and key … zealously guarded by judges who clearly have no conception of the notion of equal protection under the law.”
***
RELATED | BOMBSHELL DEPOSITION IN NANCY MACE CASE
***
Previously, our founding editor made it clear “the best way for a prominent South Carolinian to have their personal lives become public fodder on our media outlet is to try to avail themselves of a protection not afforded to other Palmetto State residents.”
Sources familiar with Maite Murphy’s complaint against her estranged husband have described it as containing all manner of damning details – the release of which would likely severely impinge upon his reelection aspirations (in the event he decides to seek another term in office in 2026).
First elected in 2010, Chris Murphy is currently in his eighth term representing S.C. House District 98 (Dorchester County) in Columbia, S.C. As for Maite Murphy, she was elected to the circuit court bench in January of 2013 and has served continuously since.
Keep it tuned to FITSNews as we track the latest developments related to these proceedings… and make no mistake, in the event an effort was made by either party to place these files under seal, we will do everything in our power to obtain them and release relevant contents to the voting public.
***
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.
3 comments
This is a serious question – why are you entitled to know the details of two people’s divorce?
If the divorce has to be blessed by a judge and on file with the court, why wouldn’t it be public information?
Because if you or I are residents of South Carolina and we are suing for divorce, every detail would be available online from our court filings. Anyone in our social circle, anyone from our neighbors to our bosses or anyone else that wishes to do so, could log on to the SC Courts website and pull up all of the files about our divorce proceedings. Yet if someone is well connected to those in power, they get to hide the details of their divorce from the public when regular folks do not get this privilege. So to answer your question, the reason IMO — I am not affiliated with FITS News to be clear — is that the government of South Carolina has determined that anyone filing for divorce is subject to having the intimate details of their divorce filings known to the public. The government decided this, and it’s how it works for most of us whether we like it or not. Surely anyone would want their divorce filings sealed, yet if I’m a typical SC resident that will not happen for me, or you. So why should the well connected get an exemption that the rest of us are not given? It’s not a matter of “we want to read filings that are always sealed and private”. It’s a matter of “these are supposed to be public filings and the well connected are getting privileges in the justice system that the rest of us do not get.” Hope that helps to answer your question, but I’ll add one more thing — if SC residents feel divorce proceedings should be private than the laws about this should be updated so that everyone’s divorce proceedings are sealed and private. But right now that’s not how it is.