Litigation

SC Court Tosses Lawsuit on Screening Panel

By Peter Hardin

South Carolina’s Supreme Court dismissed on Tuesday a family court judge’s request  to overturn a decision by the  Judicial Merit Selection Commission that she was unqualified to continue serving on the bench, according to an Associated Press article.

“While the complaint of Petitioner raises substantial and concerning judicial independence issues, it is our firm judgment that the law provides her no relief,” the court wrote in its decision, available by clicking here.

Judge F.P. ?Charlie? Segars-Andrews (in photo) challenged the way state judges are screened by a commission made up heavily of lawmakers. The legislature elects state judges, and Judge Segars-Andrews? lawsuit asked whether the commission violates South Carolina?s  constitutional ban on dual office-holding. Her lawyer asked the high court to protect the principle of judicial independence.

The court ruled that “members of the General Assembly may properly serve on the JMSC as such service is reasonably incidental to the full and effective exercise of their legislative powers.”

In addressing the judicial independence question, which the court called “the elephant in the room,” it concluded:

“We may not under some thinly veiled guise of law assert judicial power to an action taken by another branch that lies within its exclusive constitutional authority.

“The South Carolina Constitution expressly vests in the JMSC the sole determination of a judicial candidate’s qualifications, and the General Assembly is constitutionally charged with the election and re-election of judges found qualified by the JMSC.  Absent an unconstitutional exercise of those powers, the Court may not intervene in these political determinations.  To judicially intervene in the purely political determination of the JMSC would itself violate separation of powers.”

To learn more about the case, check out Gavel Grab.

Full post as published by The Gavel on March 23, 2010 (boomark / email).