Litigation

In S.C., Concerns Over Judicial Independence

By Peter Hardin

Could the independence of South Carolina’s judiciary be in jeopardy? That concern has arisen in the wake of a decision by the state’s Judicial Merit Selection Commission finding F.P. “Charlie” Segars-Andrews (photo at left) unqualified to continue to serve, according to an  article in the Charleston Post and Courier.

The commission’s decision is not yet final, but if it stands, it could terminate the veteran judge’s career. Her term runs out in June, and the legislature is not permitted to consider selecting judges whom the commission has found unqualified.

Retired Circuit Judge Gary Clary voiced concern the commission was focusing on a single case instead of the judge’s career:

“I think this sends a message to all judges that if you make a decision that results in a disgruntled litigant–and in every case you’re going to have someone who is unhappy with the decision–then judges are not going to be independent.”

Added Natalie Bluestein, a Charleston lawyer, “Every judge I know is terrified that this is going to happen to them.”

The commission addressed the complaint of a litigant in a divorce proceeding, who was unhappy that Judge Segars-Andrews did not recuse herself despite her husband’s law firm sharing in a substantial fee from a lawyer in the case. Upholding her decision to rule in the case were the S.C. Court of Appeals and the state’s Judicial Conduct Commission.

On Tuesday, lawyers for the judge asked the state Supreme Court to invalidate the commission’s finding, according to a breaking news story by the same newspaper. ?There are serious issues of constitutional law involved in this case,? her complaint stated. ?The fundamental issue involves far-reaching issues of protecting judicial independence.?

Full post as published by The Gavel on December 22, 2009 (boomark / email).