‘You’re the puppet’: Tempers erupt as Richland lawmakers spar over judge appointment
Tempers flared among Richland County lawmakers during a heated meeting regarding a judicial vacancy that some members say they had no knowledge of.
The Richland County Legislative Delegation displayed fits of shouting, dysfunction and anger on Wednesday as members slung a series of insults toward one another over the way the body has conducted the process of selecting the Richland County master-in-equity.
And amid the chaos, the county judge who’s suing the lawmakers over his reappointment was effectively eliminated from further consideration for his job after a freshman House member abruptly raised a motion, leading the delegation to officially reject the judge.
Members of the Richland County Legislative Delegation met for an emergency meeting Wednesday to formally and publicly announce a vacancy for the Richland County master-in-equity position, a judge who decides cases without a jury, such as foreclosures and contract disputes.
The heated exchange among local lawmakers came just weeks after the delegation was sued by Judge Joseph Strickland, who asked the South Carolina Supreme Court to force the Richland County Legislative Delegation to forward his name to Gov. Henry McMaster — following a favorable report by the Judicial Merit Selection Commission, where Strickland was the only candidate vying for the position — in order that he may be approved for another term that would expire in 2027.
Strickland has served as master-in-equity in Richland County since 1989. While his term expired in April of 2021, even without being officially reappointed, he remains in what’s known as a carryover status, meaning that he can remain on the bench until another candidate is appointed to replace him.
“There was never a vote by this delegation to approve or disapprove or reject (Strickland),” said state Sen. Dick Harpootlian, who, along with state Rep. Heather Bauer, filed a return with the court last month in support of Strickland’s position. “It was never a vote to declare (Strickland’s position) open.”
State Rep. Leon Howard, who chairs the Richland County Legislative Delegation, maintains that every delegation member was in fact notified of the delegation’s decision to not reappoint Strickland as master-in-equity, a claim that was vigorously and repeatedly echoed by state. Rep. Todd Rutherford, who is representing the delegation in defense against Strickland’s claims.
“You received a report from the (Judicial Merit Selection Commission),” Rutherford said to Harpootlian. “It was put on your desk, and the fact that you were too ignorant to read it and now want to lie to the public as if you weren’t notified, it’s your own fault.”
At issue in Stickland’s challenge is whether the Richland County Legislative Delegation, which comprises the state senators and representatives elected from the county, has a statutory obligation to submit a candidate’s name determined by the Judicial Merit Selection Commission to be qualified, when the commission recommends only one candidate to the delegation.
Harpootlian also took issue with the way he said Howard seemingly allowed Rutherford to run Wednesday’s meeting and control the delegation’s judicial selection process — if it could even be called a process, considering the delegation doesn’t have any “rules,” according to state Rep. Annie McDaniel.
“You’re the puppet master, and he’s the puppet,” Harpootlian said, pointing at Rutherford and Howard respectively.
In June, Howard sent a letter on behalf of the delegation, directing the Judicial Merit Selection Commission to advertise Strickland’s position as master-of-equity as vacant. That notification, however, was never formally announced to the public, hence Wednesday’s meeting.
Although the meeting was called to simply garner a vote on whether to notify the public of the deadline — Aug. 4 by noon — to apply for the master-in-equity vacancy, it devolved into a contentious judicial reform debate.
“If there was ever a case that demonstrates why we need judicial reform, this is it,” Harpootlian said. “The public believes the (judicial selection) process is fixed — that’s the fixer right there,” Harpootlian said, pointing at Rutherford.
Harpootlian’s claim that he had been “kept in the dark and lied to” about the delegation’s decision not to forward Strickland’s name to McMaster was echoed by two other members, who said they were unaware of Strickland’s carryover status until learning of his lawsuit, including Bauer and state Sen. Mia McLeod.
“This delegation is notorious for forcing candidates that they don’t like or don’t agree with or have issue with into carryover status,” McLeod said. “That’s not the way we should do business, but it has become the way this delegation does business and it’s wrong.”
In South Carolina, candidates for judicial office must first apply to the Judicial Merit Selection Commission, which is a 10-member statutorily created body charged with considering candidates’ qualifications. Following a review of a candidate’s background, the commission then forwards a report to the General Assembly, detailing whether the candidate is fit to serve. Legislators then decide which candidate they’ll recommend to McMaster for appointment.
Masters-in-equity are county-based judges who have jurisdiction in matters referred to them by the circuit courts. Masters are appointed to a six-year term by the governor, subject to the advice and consent of the General Assembly.
Rutherford’s motion to notify the public of the impending deadline to apply for the Richland County master-in-equity position passed, with Bauer and Harpootlian in opposition and McDaniel abstaining.
Following that vote, Bauer made a motion to forward Strickland’s name to McMaster — a move the freshman lawmaker was warned could cast Strickland out of further consideration for the post if the motion were voted down. Indeed, the motion failed and accomplished exactly what Bauer was trying to prevent, effectively removing any chance that Strickland will be reappointed to the bench short of a state Supreme Court ruling ordering otherwise.
This story was originally published August 3, 2023 at 5:30 AM.
