Lawmaker: Jay Lucas’ bid for SC Supreme Court seat raises ‘serious questions’

A prominent state senator is saying publicly that the candidacy of former powerful S.C. House Speaker Jay Lucas for an associate justice’s post on the S.C. Supreme Court raises “serious questions” about whether the public will continue to trust the state’s judicial system.

Senator Luke Rankin, R-Horry, who is chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee and vice-chairman of the Judicial Merit Selection Commission, wrote in a statement made public Wednesday that Lucas’ lack of judicial or appellate experience is also not a good look for the state’s judiciary.

Lucas’s only experience as a judge came in 1995 and 1996 when he spent 13 months as a town attorney for the city of Hartsville in Darlington County. Elected to the House in 1998, Lucas served as House speaker from 2014-2022, when he retired. Since then, he has been in private practice and worked from 2022 to 2024 for Prisma Health, where he was its senior executive vice president for governmental affairs. He is 68.

“Placing on our highest court a candidate whose record presents few objective indicators of judicial readiness risks further inflaming skepticism about the process and about the justice our courts administer every day,” Rankin wrote.

“Only when litigants believe that a judge is professionally prepared and academically grounded, and only when they trust a judge will act without bias, can the judgments of our courts be accepted,” Rankin wrote.

“This matters deeply because our legal system depends on citizens’ willingness to submit to and respect judicial decisions,” Rankin wrote.

The State newspaper reached out to Lucas but has not heard back from him.

Rankin’s surprise statement Wednesday added another unusual twist to a Supreme Court race already remarkable because a sitting high court associate justice — John Few, whose 10-year term is expiring — is being challenged by Lucas and two other state judges. It is rare for sitting justices to be challenged, and it is rare for a prominent senator on the Judicial Merit Selection Commission to air concerns about a candidate.

Rankin made his statement in a public document about the qualifications of candidates for various state judicial posts released to members of the General Assembly by the Judicial Merit Selection Commission. The commission screens judicial candidates, pronounces them qualified or not, and the 170 state lawmakers vote on the candidates.

Although Rankin voted with other Judicial Merit Selection Commission members to approve Lucas as a candidate for a Supreme Court justice’s post, he said he wanted to make public his concerns about Lucas’ bid.

Three other candidates are running for a vacant Supreme Court post, including the current incumbent associate justice Few, whose 10-year term is expiring. The other two candidates are S.C. Court of Appeals Judge Blake Hewitt and Administrative Law Court Chief Judge Ralph King Anderson III.

“I have no double that he (Lucas) possesses the intellect and work ethic to perform the duties of a justice. My concern instead is how is that background may be perceived by the citizens who must live with his rulings,” Rankin wrote.

“Public confidence is fragile, and perception can matter as much as or more than reality,” Rankin wrote.

These days, motives and actions of the judiciary are ”scrutinized more intensely than ever,” Rankin wrote, adding that Lucas “has not followed a traditional path through the judiciary. Because of that, I am concerned that his election may appear to be driven by legislative influence.”

Rankin said he has no doubt that Lucas “would never compromise his ethics, and his record reflects impeccable integrity. Yet what matters most is how those subject to his decisions perceive him. If they doubt his independence, they may also doubt the legitimacy of his judgments.”

Rankin also took issue with Lucas’s assertion, made in November before the commission, that he wants to serve a full 10-year term on the Supreme Court and not retire at the mandatory retirement age of 72 as other judges and justices have done.

Lucas’ recent statement that the mandatory retirement age does not apply to him “only heightens my unease,” Rankin wrote.

“It reinforces the possible perception that his candidacy and any future service on the Court may be treated differently because he is a former legislator. Even the appearance that a judge believes he is exempt from rules that govern others threatens public confidence in the fairness and uniformity of our judicial system,” Rankin wrote.

“I believe a justice of the Supreme Court must be more than simply qualified. He must present credentials and an appearance of impartiality that are beyond reproach,” Rankin wrote.

In remarks before the Judicial Merit Selection Commission in November, Lucas said his broad experience as a lawyer handling numerous kinds of cases more than qualifies him to be a Supreme Court justice.

Not having been a state judge in a trial or appeals courts will actually help him be a better justice, Lucas said. “I don’t think the Supreme Court is a court of elevation. I think it should embrace judgment, embrace wisdom, embrace the entirety of things you learn in a legal career.”

Associate Supreme Court justices make approximately $233,000 a year.

Rankin’s statement was included as part of the draft report of the Judicial Merit Selection Report on judge’s qualifications. The final report is due Feb. 9

The election for the Supreme Court post will be March 4.

This story was originally published January 28, 2026 at 1:42 PM.