Skip to main content

Judicial Reform in South Carolina



 Judicial Reform in South Carolina

By Dennis Mitchell


The Article of Rights, Section 8 - Separation of Powers, of the South Carolina Constitution states, “In the government of this State, the legislative, executive and judicial powers of the government shall be forever separate and distinct from each other, and no persons or persons exercising the functions of one of the said departments shall assume or discharge the duties of any other.”


Separation of Powers is the basis of American Democracy, established by the Founding Fathers in the U. S. Constitution and copied by the states throughout the nation. In South Carolina, the letter of the law is followed with no person in one body exercising the functions of another. However, the method of selecting judges in the state, almost entirely in the hands of the legislature, has increasingly brought the question of undue influence by lawyers/legislators over the members of the judiciary.


For that reason, judicial reform, changing the way the judges are selected in this state has been a topic of debate in the legislature and among citizens. The General Assembly is currently considering tweaking the selection process but still leaving most of the responsibility for selecting judges in the hands of legislators. Hence, it is questionable if South Carolina is truly in line with the spirit of the above law.


Over 91 percent of the voters in the February 2024 Presidential Primary answered “Yes” to a ballot advisory question of whether the process of selecting judges should be changed. The General Assembly is doing the minimum in that area in an attempt to assuage the voters. Horry County Senator Luke Rankin, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, made a speech on the Senate floor essentially defending the current system.


The current system needs more than tweaking. A reasonable change would seem to be to allow Judges to be elected by the people on the ballot. There is no reason the voters should not be allowed to elect judges. By taking the process out of the hands of lawyers/legislators the spirit of Separation of Powers would be more fully realized

Labels:

Popular posts from this blog

Saturday Cartoon 3-16-24

 
Read more

It's pronounced Or-ree!!!

  This first edition offers some insights into this weekly article and provides a brief history of Horry County.  Our readers can expect an array of subjects, topics, and stories, both current and past, that have opinion, fact, and some stories passed down over time with no collaboration aka Horry County lure.  No subject will be off-limits, and the goal is to be entertaining, informative, thought provoking, and simply a fun read.      Horry County: Pronounced (OR-ree), was occupied primarily by the Chicora Indian before English settlement in the early 1700’s. Not named Horry County until 1801, initial settlement was in 1732 by English settlers that made their way up the Waccamaw River from Georgetown to settle on a high bluff area overlooking the river where history claims the group of explores killed a bear eventually naming the area Kings Town in honor of the English King to later be named Conway.   Located in the easternmost region of the State, fr...
Read more

Rankin Out of Touch

  Luke Rankin is out of Touch with Voters Horry County Senator Luke Rankin put himself in a political box last week that he will find it difficult to get out of as reelection time rolls around. With reform of the process which elects judges in the state being a hot topic among the voters and other elected officials, Rankin chose last week to voice support, in an hour-long speech on the Senate floor last week, for the current process. As Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee and Vice Chairman of the Judicial Merit Selection Commission, Rankin has a lot of say in who becomes judges in South Carolina. He probably can’t be blamed for wanting to keep that power in his hands. However, 695,791 voters in the recent South Carolina Presidential Primary election answered a question included on the ballot of whether the current process of electing judges in the state should be reformed. Over 91 percent, 634,345 to be exact, said YES. When 9 out of every 10 voters disagree with the positio...
Read more