SC Supreme Court hears Wilson-Pascoe case but makes no ruling

The South Carolina Supreme Court on Thursday peppered opposing lawyers with questions in the dispute over whether Attorney General Alan Wilson has the authority to remove a special prosecutor from a State Grand Jury investigation.

But the justices took no action and gave no sign of when they might rule on the highly publicized case.

After the argument, Wilson left the courtroom with top members of his legal staff without stopping to talk to the press.

Wilson has hired a private attorney, Mitch Brown of Columbia, to argue his side of the case.

Pascoe, who argued his own case to the court, declined comment.

Last year, Wilson and his office appointed 1st Circuit Solicitor David Pascoe to carry out an investigation into possible public corruption in the S.C. General Assembly.

According to confidential law enforcement documents reviewed by The State newspaper, that investigation, in part, involved political associates of Wilson’s.

In March, after Pascoe and State Law Enforcement Division chief Mark Keel got Circuit Judge Clifton Newman to authorize a State Grand Jury to help with the investigation, Wilson accused Pascoe of not following a state law that requires the attorney general to activate a State Grand Jury. Wilson announced he was firing Pascoe.

In legal briefs filed with the Supreme Court, Pascoe said since Wilson designated him as an independent prosecutor in the investigation, he didn’t need Wilson’s authorization to activate the State Grand Jury.

A State Grand Jury has special powers that an ordinary county grand jury doesn’t have, such as the ability to subpoena emails and financial records. It is considered a powerful law enforcement tool in any investigation.

Thursday’s arguments had historic overtones and touched on all three branches of state government – the judicial, the legislative and the executive.

The basic legal question before the justices was whether an attorney general, having recused himself from an ongoing criminal investigation because of a conflict of interest, can jump back into that investigation and fire his supposedly independent special prosecutor.

Politically, the major question is whether Wilson, in trying to fire Pascoe, is trying to protect certain lawmakers in the General Assembly. Wilson denies that allegation.

“People are wondering whether this is an attempt to block an investigation by Solicitor Pascoe to protect certain people,” said John Crangle, executive director of S.C. Common Cause and longtime observer of ethical questions in state government. Crangle was at Thursday’s hearing.

Crangle said it might undermine public confidence if the Supreme Court rules that Wilson can fire Pascoe and put someone else in charge of the investigation.

“If Wilson takes the investigation back and appoints another prosecutor, and there’s no indictment, that will make a lot of people suspicious,” Crangle said. “But if Pascoe reaches the end of his investigation and doesn’t indict anyone, people can accept that.”

This story was originally published June 16, 2016 at 11:32 AM with the headline "SC Supreme Court hears Wilson-Pascoe case but makes no ruling."