COLUMBIA--While some judges at the federal level are accused by conservatives of being activists and promoting an agenda, South Carolina's justices are praised by lawmakers and legal experts as fair.

The state Supreme Court has not shied away from controversial decisions in recent years, ruling in February 2004 that Gov. Mark Sanford's service in the U.S. Air Force Reserve does not violate the South Carolina Constitution's requirement that governors only serve in state militias.

And in January, the justices struck down parts of a bill that was supposed to provide tax breaks to pharmaceutical companies and incentives for creating high-paying, technology jobs, but ended up adding several other items including establishing a culinary arts program at a Charleston college.

After the rulings, there were rumblings that the court didn't go far enough to uphold the state constitution.

Richard Gershon, dean of the new Charleston School of Law, wasn't surprised. He said good judges sometimes upset lawmakers or others.

Gershon praised Chief Justice Jean Toal and the rest of the state Supreme Court.

"We ought to be real proud at what she's done to bring the court system in South Carolina forward," he said.

Sen. Mike Fair, R-Greenville, is among the conservatives angry with some federal judges who he says "want to make law" in abortion and other hot-button cases.

But Fair doesn't have any significant problems with the state court system, which he said "flies under the radar."

He said the state Supreme Court appears to defer to the Legislature to write or clarify laws when possible. "Our Supreme Court doesn't appear to be making laws," Fair said.

Last month, Toal said her court will make a tough call when it's necessary, but favors "upholding the constitutionality of a statute if there is any way to do it."

"Our court is seen as a very traditional court that understands well the separation of powers and the very focused role we have in interpreting the law and not establishing policy," she said.

Toal, a former state representative, isn't afraid to engage legislators directly.

In April, she appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee to tell its members about flaws she saw in bills that would allow drivers to avoid point penalties on their license and let lawyers directly question jurors in more cases.

Toal said she only appeared because the bills would negatively affect her ability to run the judicial branch.

"Your judgment call about the policies of this state is something I respect and uphold in every way," she told senators.

Many lawmakers think Toal and the rest of the high court have the right idea and don't take it personally when a ruling doesn't go their way.

"Even when I disagree with their opinions, I think they are doing a good job," said Sen. Darrell Jackson, D-Hopkins.