The Time for Judicial Reform is Now

By Senator Michael Johnson

It is basic Civics 101. The Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches are separate, but equal, branches of government – with checks and balances to keep each from having too much power. The problemarises when one of the branches of government is able to manipulate and intimidate another branch, which is exactly what is happening now in South Carolina.

For the past year numerous articles have been written in papers all across our state detailing the abuses of certain members of the legislature. You may have read about a convicted killer being released from prison 16 years before the end of his term (he was later returned to prison) due to a legislator. The good news is that there are very few bad actors. The bad news is that even one person doing this is one too many.

Currently South Carolina elects judges in a system that uses the Judicial Merit Screening Committee (JMSC) and the legislature, with no input from the executive branch. Anyone who wants to run for a judicial position submits an application and begins the screening process. The JMSC is appointed by the legislature, and three of the ten members are from the legislature. In other words, we control the process.

Once the candidates have been screened and found qualified, three names are submitted by the JMSC. The legislature then votes on those candidates and the winner becomes a judge. This system has given our state fantastic judges, outside groups from around the country praise our system. The problem is that it gives certain legislators, those sitting on the JMSC, too much power. If a judge makes them angry, they can use their power to remove the judge when they come back in six years to be re-elected.

In order to solve this problem, I along with Senator Greg Hembree (R-Horry) and Senator Wes Climer (R-York) began drafting a bill to change the way we elect judges, S.1046. This bill gives the Governor two appointments, the Speaker of the House one appointment, the Chairman of the House Judiciary one appointment, the President of the Senate one appointment, the Chairman of the Senate Judiciary one appointment, one appointment to the Commission on Prosecution Coordination (Solicitors), one to the Commission on Indigent Defense (Public Defenders), and one to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court who must appoint a retired judge.

No one on the JMSC can be a member of the legislature or be related to a legislator. Perhaps equally as important, anyone running to be a judge must have been out of the legislature at least two years and cannot be related to a sitting member of the legislature. We limit the terms for members of the JMSC to two 4-year terms, which will be staggered.

Additionally, instead of only three candidates being able to move forward through the process, we allow everyone who is found qualified to come before the legislature. The bill also changes the weighting of the voting between the House and Senate. Currently the judge with the most votes between the two chambers wins. Our bill will require that any judicial candidate have the majority vote of each chamber, not just the most overall votes. This puts the House and Senate on equal footing when it comes to judges, something that does not exist now as there are almost three times as many House members as there are Senators.

While no system is perfect, I believe that these changes will bring our system out of the shadows and into the light. It will restore the balance between the judicial and legislative branches, and give the executive branch a role. The Senate will debate judicial reform in the next few weeks, and I encourage you to give feedback and make your voice heard.