In Columbia, South Carolina, judicial reform has surged to the forefront of public discourse, capturing widespread attention and sparking passionate debate. The conversation has traditionally centered around the method of selecting judges, but recent discussions indicate a shift towards more comprehensive changes.

Lawmakers and legal professionals are advocating for an expansive range of reforms. These include enhanced oversight of magistrate appointments, ensuring higher standards of transparency and accuracy in the management of court records, and improving the integrity of prison data systems. Such changes are seen as crucial steps toward a more accountable and efficient judicial process.

South Carolina’s approach to selecting judges is notably distinctive. Unlike the majority of states, where governors have the authority to appoint judges and the public participates through elections, South Carolina stands as one of only two states where the legislature has the power to select judges. This unique system has come under scrutiny as part of the broader reform efforts, with many arguing for a reevaluation of these entrenched practices.

Currently in South Carolina, the process of selecting a judge is unique.

Unlike most states, where governors are tasked with appointing judges and voters elect them, South Carolina is one of two states that lets state legislature select judges.

A law that took effect in July 2025 gives the governor a limited role in some appointments, but the South Carolina General Assembly still holds the majority of the power in choosing judges.

“They expanded the committee so that the governor got more power, so the legislature gave up some of their own power voluntarily,” said Rhodes Bailey, a South Carolina based attorney.

The law also includes allowances for appointing magistrate judges, who handle bail, warrants, and minor criminal cases. Many magistrates are appointed without formal legal experience.

“[The magistrate position.] That’s a judicial position that is the gateway to all of these criminal prosecutions,” said Gov. Henry McMaster said. “It can be a devastating thing. It’s heavy duty legal work.”

McMaster and Attorney General Alan Wilson said judicial reform is a top priority for judicial reform.

“You absolutely need to have a minimum level of experience to be able to sit in as a magistrate in a local area, whether it’s a law degree; it could be experience in law enforcement experience in some other capacity,” Wilson said.

Concerns regarding outdated technology and inaccuracies in court records have also been vocalized by state leaders. When data is wrong or missing, the consequences can be huge; causing incorrect releases, wrongful detentions, or missed charges.

“Processing everything from fingerprints to records,” he said. “Put new funding and improve the technology, that way criminals are classified when they come in and out of jail.”

Rep. Micah Caskey (R – Lexington) said the Mother Emanuel AME Church shooting in Charleston that took place in 2015 is a prime example.

“Part of the problem in the system was that information regarding pending charges against Dylann Roof had not been accurately entered into the system,” Caskey said.

Wilson said although he can’t enact judicial reform himself, his office has worked for years to use cases and investigations as ideas and suggestions for lawmakers.

“Give us a report with findings and recommendations that the General Assembly can use as a roadmap to do reforms to our criminal justice system,” he continued.

While there is broad agreement among officials about the kinds of reforms needed from magistrate qualifications, oversight, and technology upgrades, the actual power to enact change lies with the state’s General Assembly.

Only lawmakers can pass bills that mandate minimum qualifications for magistrates, allocate funding for system upgrades, reform judicial selection panels and strengthen transparency and oversight.