FEW PEOPLE IN South Carolina have done more to improve the
quality and independence of our judges than Sen. Glenn
McConnell.
When Mr. McConnell stepped down earlier this month as chairman of
the state’s Judicial Merit Selection Commission, the news release
modestly noted that he had been a member of that panel, serving
every other year as chairman, since its creation in 1997.
What the news release left out was that that Mr. McConnell also
served on that panel’s predecessor, a constitutionally weak but
occasionally politically powerful screening committee, for more than
a decade before that. Or that when he was still in the minority
party, he used the power of his personality and his perseverance to
help push through a string of reforms that slowly dismantled the
system of legislative cronyism that defined the judicial selection
process and replaced it with a system within which who you know only
counts once you’re able to measurably demonstrate that what you know
is impressive. Or that the independent screening panel might never
had been created if not for Mr. McConnell’s support.
Mr. McConnell didn’t just work to change our laws. Since first
becoming chairman of that predecessor committee in 1993 (a role he
handed off in alternate years to the ranking House member), he used
whatever powers the law at the time granted to boost the most able
candidates and to hold back those who shouldn’t be judges. For this
hands-on service and his work toward reform, our state owes him a
debt of gratitude.
Mr. McConnell has tapped Jim Ritchie, a smart, independent-minded
senator, to replace him as chairman. But his departure, along with
that of Sen. Tom Moore, leaves a troubling gap of institutional
memory on the commission at a time when it is increasingly under
fire from lawmakers who want to rescind important reforms that have
injected merit into the selection process. Only one of the senators
now on the panel was in the Legislature to see why changes were made
in 1997, and, alarmingly, that is Sen. Robert Ford, whose infamous
boasting of his vote-trading to put the least qualified candidates
on the bench (“I had to sell my soul to 10 devils.”) became a
flashpoint for the reforms.
Although the three House members of the panel all lived through
the reforms, we worry that this institutional memory loss still
could weaken resistance to dangerous changes disguised as
improvements.
Some changes clearly are needed in the way judges are selected in
South Carolina. The low number of African-American and female judges
has the potential to undermine confidence in the judiciary. And the
lack of these and other types of diversity can result in an
unbalanced court. A judge should always apply the law regardless of
his personal preferences, but the experiences a judge brings to the
bench influences how she evaluates the facts.
Unfortunately, changes being proposed would not increase the
diversity of the bench but would return us to the cronyism of a
decade ago. Any changes will be made by the full Legislature, not
the merit commission, but Mr. McConnell’s work on the commission has
strengthened his stalwart resistance to ill-considered changes. It
will be important for Mr. Ritchie to take on that mantle — and for
Mr. McConnell to maintain his interest in protecting reform now that
he is not as intimately involved in the process.
.gif){kind=spacer}
