As South Carolina’s November 3, 2026 gubernatorial contest draws near, a coalition of state leaders is intensifying calls for judicial reform. The issue has become a central theme in the campaign, with Attorney General Alan Wilson, Rep. Jermaine Johnson, and U.S. Congressman Ralph Norman all urging changes to the way judges are selected.
Poll Shows Broad Republican Backing
A recent poll of Republican voters found that 85% believe judicial reform is necessary. The poll, conducted among likely Republican participants, underscores the strong appetite for change within the party’s base.
Key Voices Call for Change
Attorney General Wilson said, “I have always advocated that appointments to the Judicial Merit Selection Commission rest in the hands of the Governor. Reforming the JMSC and how we select judges in our state will change the imbalance of power in our judicial system in South Carolina.” He added at a campaign kickoff Saturday, “Judicial Reform? We’re not done with that yet!”
U.S. Congressman Ralph Norman echoed the sentiment, stating, “We desperately need judicial reform in South Carolina. Letting trial lawyer politicians pick the judges is a conflict of interest, and it’s resulting in criminals being prioritized over victims.”
Congresswoman Nancy Mace, a former gubernatorial candidate, also weighed in, saying, “You want justice in South Carolina? No more lawyer legislators picking the very judges they argue in front of.” Mace’s remarks were provided to MyrtleBeachSC News via email.
Legal Experts Support an Independent Judiciary
South Carolina’s 1st Solicitor, David Pascoe, who helped expose corruption in the state House, warned, “An independent Judiciary is crucial for a republic. You can’t have the appearance of an independent Judiciary when the legislature controls the entire process of selecting our judges.” He called for removing legislators from the Judicial Merit Selection Committee.
Rep. Joe White added, “South Carolina needs judicial reform because no single branch of government should control the selection of our judges—we need the balance of power that comes when the executive branch nominates and the legislative branch confirms.”
Historical Context of Judicial Selections
The article’s documentary review highlights longstanding connections between legislators and judges, noting that former Circuit Court Judge J. Cordell Maddox Jr. served in the House before his 2002 judicial appointment. Critics point to past instances where legislators influenced nominations, raising concerns about impartiality.
While the review details various political and professional links, it does not allege wrongdoing beyond the documented associations. The focus remains on the structural issue: the General Assembly’s current role in selecting judges.
What’s Next?
With the governor’s race only weeks away, candidates are expected to continue emphasizing judicial reform in debates and campaign materials. The strong Republican poll support suggests the issue could sway undecided voters who prioritize a fair and balanced judicial system.
State officials say any reform would likely involve shifting appointment authority to the governor while retaining legislative confirmation, a model that mirrors the federal system’s checks and balances. The proposal aims to preserve the Constitution’s separation of powers while enhancing public confidence in the courts.
Original reporting: MyrtleBeachSC News — read the source article.
