Blab Politics
South Carolina GOP Governor Runoff Intensifies Over 2024 Richland County Judicial Race
The Republican primary runoff for South Carolina governor, set for June 23, 2026, has sharpened into a heated clash between Lt. Gov. Pamela Evette and Attorney General Alan Wilson over a 2024 circuit‑court race in Richland County.
The dispute began when two lawyers sought a Richland County circuit‑court seat in 2024. Public Service Commission member Justin Williams and former Democratic gubernatorial nominee James Smith entered the race. Williams pulled out in January after it became clear he lacked the backing needed to win. The election was originally scheduled for February, postponed to April, and then rejected by the General Assembly because Smith had received Planned Parenthood endorsement during his 2018 gubernatorial bid. The legislature reopened the application process for the judgeship.
Wilson’s campaign maintains that it only made two phone calls to Smith in support of his candidacy. Evette’s surrogates, however, have been quick to criticize that support, arguing that Smith’s pro‑abortion stance conflicts with the conservative values the Evette campaign claims to represent. At a recent news conference, state Rep. Melissa Oremus, R‑Aiken, said, “When I found out what this man stood for, I was flabbergasted. And I could not believe somebody that stood for pro‑life issues or claimed to would advocate for such a horrible human being that is completely opposite of who I am and what I stand for.”
Beyond the personal attacks, the candidates have framed the issue as a broader debate over judicial reform. Evette has called for a system in which the governor appoints judges and the General Assembly confirms them—a change that would require a constitutional amendment. Wilson, by contrast, has pushed for a model in which all members of the Judicial Merit Selection Commission are appointed by the governor, while the General Assembly retains the power to elect judges. Wilson’s deputy campaign manager, Claire Brady, explained, “Wilson led the charge on judicial reform for years. Smith met the legal qualifications to serve on the bench and was a safer alternative to the other candidate who was also a Democrat. It is a prime example of why Wilson has fought to reform the system.”
Evette’s team also highlighted that Wilson’s campaign labeled Williams a Democrat, a claim that Evette’s side has contested. A review of Williams’ voting history, from records held by the South Carolina Election Commission, shows that since 2010 he voted on Democratic ballots in five primaries and on Republican ballots in three primaries. Williams, who serves on the Public Service Commission, has called himself a moderate and declined to comment on the current dispute.
Wilson’s campaign declined to elaborate on the allegations. In response, Evette’s campaign manager Megan Finnern issued a statement saying, “Alan Wilson is trying to rewrite history. Like a typical career politician, in his rush to justify and quickly dismiss the fact that he lobbied for his friend — a liberal, pro‑planned parenthood, pro‑transgender Democrat — James Smith for a judgeship in 2024, he got caught in a lie.”
The runoff remains a high‑stakes contest that will decide South Carolina’s Republican nominee for governor. Both candidates have used the judicial‑reform debate to differentiate themselves: Evette emphasizing a more conservative appointment process, Wilson underscoring his long‑standing advocacy for merit‑based selection. The June 23 vote will determine whether the GOP nominee carries forward one of these agendas into the November gubernatorial election.
The runoff is scheduled for Tuesday, June 23, 2026. No additional statements have been issued by either campaign regarding the judicial‑reform dispute.
The dispute began when two lawyers sought a Richland County circuit‑court seat in 2024. Public Service Commission member Justin Williams and former Democratic gubernatorial nominee James Smith entered the race. Williams pulled out in January after it became clear he lacked the backing needed to win. The election was originally scheduled for February, postponed to April, and then rejected by the General Assembly because Smith had received Planned Parenthood endorsement during his 2018 gubernatorial bid. The legislature reopened the application process for the judgeship.
Wilson’s campaign maintains that it only made two phone calls to Smith in support of his candidacy. Evette’s surrogates, however, have been quick to criticize that support, arguing that Smith’s pro‑abortion stance conflicts with the conservative values the Evette campaign claims to represent. At a recent news conference, state Rep. Melissa Oremus, R‑Aiken, said, “When I found out what this man stood for, I was flabbergasted. And I could not believe somebody that stood for pro‑life issues or claimed to would advocate for such a horrible human being that is completely opposite of who I am and what I stand for.”
Beyond the personal attacks, the candidates have framed the issue as a broader debate over judicial reform. Evette has called for a system in which the governor appoints judges and the General Assembly confirms them—a change that would require a constitutional amendment. Wilson, by contrast, has pushed for a model in which all members of the Judicial Merit Selection Commission are appointed by the governor, while the General Assembly retains the power to elect judges. Wilson’s deputy campaign manager, Claire Brady, explained, “Wilson led the charge on judicial reform for years. Smith met the legal qualifications to serve on the bench and was a safer alternative to the other candidate who was also a Democrat. It is a prime example of why Wilson has fought to reform the system.”
Evette’s team also highlighted that Wilson’s campaign labeled Williams a Democrat, a claim that Evette’s side has contested. A review of Williams’ voting history, from records held by the South Carolina Election Commission, shows that since 2010 he voted on Democratic ballots in five primaries and on Republican ballots in three primaries. Williams, who serves on the Public Service Commission, has called himself a moderate and declined to comment on the current dispute.
Wilson’s campaign declined to elaborate on the allegations. In response, Evette’s campaign manager Megan Finnern issued a statement saying, “Alan Wilson is trying to rewrite history. Like a typical career politician, in his rush to justify and quickly dismiss the fact that he lobbied for his friend — a liberal, pro‑planned parenthood, pro‑transgender Democrat — James Smith for a judgeship in 2024, he got caught in a lie.”
The runoff remains a high‑stakes contest that will decide South Carolina’s Republican nominee for governor. Both candidates have used the judicial‑reform debate to differentiate themselves: Evette emphasizing a more conservative appointment process, Wilson underscoring his long‑standing advocacy for merit‑based selection. The June 23 vote will determine whether the GOP nominee carries forward one of these agendas into the November gubernatorial election.
The runoff is scheduled for Tuesday, June 23, 2026. No additional statements have been issued by either campaign regarding the judicial‑reform dispute.
