|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
by WILL FOLKS
***
Backed by an unlikely alliance of South Carolina lawmakers, the pro-citizen DOGE SC movement unveiled a comprehensive judicial reform bill this week aimed at dramatically improving the way judges are selected in the Palmetto State.
According to a news release from the movement, its reform proposal aims to “redefine how judges are selected and end legislative domination of the state judiciary.”
“Restoring the separation of powers and checks and balances that our Founders fought and died for are foundational to the Palmetto Revolution,” said Rom Reddy, the Isle of Palms, S.C. businessman who founded DOGE SC. “If our Founders were ready to die for it, we should be ready to fight for it.”
Consistent with our exclusive reporting last week, the DOGE SC legislation – a key plank of its “Palmetto Revolution”- proposes a “comprehensive overhaul” of the scandal-scarred S.C. Judicial Merit Selection Commission (JMSC). That’s the legislatively controlled, 12-member panel which screens judicial candidates and determines which ones advance to a vote by the whole General Assembly.

***
According to Reddy’s group, the current structure of the JMSC “violates the Constitutional separation of powers, creates clear conflicts of interest and undermines judicial independence.”
The DOGE SC bill would:
- Remove all legislative control over the JMSC and transfer authority to the executive branch
- The Governor will appoint the 12 JMSC members (which may include law enforcement officials)
- The JMSC will recommend judicial nominees to the General Assembly, and the legislature may confirm by simple majority vote
- Under this plan, the Governor does not directly choose judges but appoints the members who evaluate them
- These reforms restore checks and balances and prevent a small cadre of legislator-lawyers from continuing to dominate judicial selection.
South Carolina would remain one of only two states in America (Virginia is the other) in which lawmakers elect judges, but the process by which judicial candidates are submitted for legislative consideration would be dramatically altered – which a marked shift toward executive influence.
Will such a dramatic alteration be enough to reverse decades of unjust outcomes? Outcomes which, as FITSNews reiterated last week, have “imperiled individual liberties, eroded public safety, re-victimized victims, decimated judicial independence and destroyed public faith in the integrity of our court system?”
We shall see… hopefully this legislation will mark a significant step toward the constitutional changes we believe are necessary. It is certainly a dramatic improvement over the “reform” bill passed last year.
As significant as the boldness of the DOGE SC proposal? Its breadth of support…
***
RELATED | PROSECUTORS, CRIME VICTIMS PUT PRESSURE ON LAWMAKERS
***
The House version of the DOGE SC bill will be sponsored by S.C. speaker Murrell Smith and Freedom Caucus chairman Jordan Pace, along with representatives Gil Gatch, April Cromer, Joe White, Gary Brewer, Brandon Guffey, Brandon Newton and Heath Sessions.
That list of sponsors represents remarkable – some might say astonishing – development given the House GOP caucus has been at war with the Freedom Caucus (and vice versa) for the better part of the past two years.
In the Senate, the DOGE SC bill is backed by senators Wes Climer, Michael Johnson, Sean Bennett, JD Chaplin, Tom Davis, Stephen Goldfinch, Larry Grooms, Carlisle Kennedy, Josh Kimbrell, Everett Stubbs, Rex Rice and Ross Turner.
“Every South Carolinian deserves equal justice under the law, but rampant conflicts of interest and legislative dominance of the judiciary denies us that bedrock American principle of justice,” Climer said in announcing his sponsorship of the bill.
Several longtime proponents of judicial reform also hailed the proposal.
S.C. first circuit solicitor David Pascoe – who is currently campaigning for attorney general – called the bill “the most serious and meaningful reform effort in decades.”
Current attorney general Alan Wilson also praised the bill, saying it would foster a “fair, transparent and accountable judicial system.”
“I’ve long argued the current system allows select legislators to hand pick judges without meaningful checks from the executive branch,” Wilson said. “Right now, the Governor doesn’t have a seat at the table when it comes to judicial accountability. That needs to change. I’m grateful DOGE SC, Rom Reddy, and legislators are joining us in this important fight. We must balance our government and restore accountability to the people.”
***
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.



2 comments
“Under this plan, the Governor does not directly choose judges but appoints the members who evaluate them”
Hahaha. Translation: The Governor picks judges.
Anyone who doesn’t believe the appointed lackeys will be there solely to do the governor’s bidding probably believes DOGE SC is a good idea.
Seriously, does anyone think any of these clowns running for governor will do a better job?
“The JMSC will recommend judicial nominees to the General Assembly, and the legislature may confirm by simple majority vote”. This provision by itself would be a major improvement to the selection of judges. Unless it has changed, the 46 Senators shuffle over to the House Chamber with its 124 House members to elect judges. A judge could have the votes to be elected from just House members even if the Senate voted all 46 votes for one judge. The Upper House has no real clout in these elections unless the House allows them. Yet, they continue the charade. Real reform would also address vote swapping for judges in a current election in exchange for the support for another candidate when the vacancy is to be filled. The present system is not working so why not try something new.