Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Juvenile Justice topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Subcommittee carries over bill narrowing juvenile‑court protections for some 16‑ and 17‑year‑olds
Summary
Bill 41 51 would send certain 16‑year‑olds accused of the most serious offenses directly to general sessions and expand adult‑court handling for some 17‑year‑old weapons offenses; the panel carried the bill over to allow staff and stakeholders to refine language on waivers, defense motions and housing implications.
A legislative subcommittee carried over bill 41 51 after extensive testimony over whether parts of the measure would roll back portions of the state's Raise‑the‑Age reforms. Miss Baker summarized the bill as adding certain minors to the list excluded from the juvenile code so some 16‑year‑olds would begin in general sessions for the most serious crimes, and some 17‑year‑old weapon offenses would likewise be handled in adult court.
Eden Hendrick of the Department of Juvenile Justice told the panel the proposal is intended to be narrow and focused on the most serious offenses that would carry life or long adult sentences; Hendrick said waiver hearings have "increased over 300%" since Raise‑the‑Age took effect and that lengthy waiver processing has left youth in detention for extended periods. "This point is a resource problem and a workforce problem," Hendrick said, adding that eliminating a small group of waiver cases could let DJJ focus on younger youth who need more attention.
David Stumbo, solicitor of the eighth judicial circuit, and other solicitors supported the narrow rollback for very violent offenses and warned that preserving certain defense‑motion language could clog the court process and delay victims’ access to hearings. "The waiver process lasts 9 months minimum," Stumbo said, and solicitors favored streamlining the procedure for the most serious adult‑level offenses.
Courtney Thomas, political director for the ACLU of South Carolina, urged rejection of the bill, warning that rollbacks in other states have led to many children being prosecuted as adults for nonviolent crimes. She cited a post‑rollback example in which a large share of youths charged as adults were not accused of violent offenses and urged caution against moving more children into adult confinement.
Hugh Ryan, executive director with the South Carolina Commission on Indigent Defense, recommended improving waiver timelines and resourcing evaluators and court capacity rather than a broad jurisdictional rollback. After discussion, a senator moved to carry the bill over to allow staff to work with DJJ, solicitors and other stakeholders on drafting and process fixes; the motion passed with no recorded opposition.
The chair asked staff to produce revised language and to provide the committee with pending waiver lists and time‑in‑detention data to inform further deliberations.
