The General Assembly returned to the State House on January 9 but to date there has been little or no public attention to issues of elections, voting, redistricting, or the judiciary. The House has been very focused on limiting medical care for persons with gender dysphoria rather than in useful governance issues. However, we do expect some developments in issues relevant to these MDW Updates as the session continues.
The Judiciary
There continues to be interest in both houses of the General Assembly in reform of the judicial selection process. The House of Representatives began its work through the “Ad Hoc Committee to Examine the Judicial Selection and Retention Process” before the session began. They met on November 7, 14 and 28, receiving extensive invited testimony. The meetings have been contentious. No public testimony has been received to date.
Most of those who have spoken to the Committee have supported reform of JMSC membership by removing legislators. Broadening the pool of qualified applicants forwarded to the General Assembly for consideration has been strongly recommended. Some also have addressed the need for enhanced qualifications and training for magistrates.
As noted in our previous MDW Update, The League of Women Voters has considered issues surrounding the judiciary in South Carolina in a lengthy study that culminated in 2012. Based on that study, we strongly support a JMSC composed of independent experts, not legislators. However, our position is grounded not in any allegations of abuse but simply in constitutional government principles.
We further strongly encourage broadening the pool of qualified applicants forwarded to legislators for their consideration. A broader pool recognizes the appropriate role of legislators, while reducing the impact of political influence through JMSC. It is also hoped that a broader range of qualified candidates would lead to greater diversity on the bench. The people of South Carolina have a rich variety of life experiences that are badly needed in our judiciary to ensure just decision-making. The belief expressed by some legislators, including the Senate Majority Leader, that the judiciary should reflect only their own political perspective is contrary to the principles of good government.
Voting and The Election Process
No action has been taken since the beginning of the session on H. 3734, which would significantly change municipal election administration. It has passed the House and we expect the Senate to move forward on it this year.
We also note the completion of a multi-year study of the State Election Commission by the SC Legislative Audit Council (https://lac.sc.gov/reports/reports-agency-a-k/sec-2024). LAC found room for improvement in several areas but did not find evidence of fraud or of any defect that would throw the integrity of our elections into doubt. We strongly encourage review of this report by all who are concerned with the integrity of our elections and the public confidence in elections required for our democracy to flourish. The SC Daily Gazette has published an article on this report that should be of interest (https://scdailygazette.com/2024/01/17/auditors-find-no-fraud-in-sc-election-process-but-make-some-clean-up-suggestions/).
