Julian Raines & Jill Swing — The Patient-Advocacy Origins of SC Cannabis Reform

Last verified: May 2026

Julian Marcus Raines

Julian Marcus Raines was, in 2013–2014, a young child living in South Carolina with treatment-resistant epilepsy. His family’s public testimony at the State House — describing the frequency and severity of Julian’s seizures, the failure of traditional anti-epileptic drugs, and the family’s research into low-THC, high-CBD treatments emerging from Charlotte’s Web (CO) and other early cannabidiol-focused growers — provided the political momentum that allowed Republican legislators to support a heavily restricted CBD authorization while maintaining their broader prohibition stance.

The Raines family’s public profile was relatively brief; after Julian’s Law passed in June 2014, the family stepped back from sustained advocacy. The "Julian’s Law" naming has nonetheless become permanent in SC legal and policy discourse.

Jill Swing and the SC Compassionate Care Alliance

Where the Raines family’s advocacy was concentrated around the 2013–2014 Julian’s Law campaign, Jill Swing’s advocacy has spanned more than a decade. Swing is the mother of a child with severe epilepsy. She founded the South Carolina Compassionate Care Alliance as the primary patient-advocacy organization supporting both Julian’s Law and the subsequent broader Compassionate Care Act campaigns led by Sen. Tom Davis.

The SC Compassionate Care Alliance has been the principal organized parent-advocate voice in SC cannabis reform debate. Its testimony has appeared at every major committee hearing on Julian’s Law, S.150 (2022), S.423 (2024), and S.53 (2025–26). The Alliance is independent of the broader SC Cannabis Coalition (which advocates more comprehensively for medical-cannabis reform) but typically aligned in legislative testimony.

The Patient-Family Testimony Pattern

Patient-family testimony has been the most consistent reform-side public-facing advocacy in SC, distinguishing the SC reform effort from cannabis-policy debates in other states where industry stakeholders and adult-use advocates often dominate. The pattern reflects the structural reality that SC reform must persuade socially conservative Republican legislators; patient families with severe-epilepsy and treatment-resistant pediatric conditions provide cross-partisan emotional resonance that adult-use framing typically does not.

This dynamic has shaped the substantive design of SC reform proposals. Sen. Davis’s "most conservative program in the country" framing for S.53 reflects a strategic calculation that the testimony of Jill Swing, the Raines family, and similarly situated parents will move Republican legislators only if the underlying program is structured to address their concerns about diversion, public-safety risk, and the federal-installation footprint.

Other Reform-Side Patient Advocates

Beyond the Raines and Swing families, the reform coalition includes:

• Cancer patients and survivors — particularly oncology patients managing chemotherapy-related nausea who have testified for the cancer-condition coverage in the Compassionate Care Act’s qualifying-conditions list.
• Veterans — including Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom veterans who have testified for PTSD coverage. The military-installation density of SC (Joint Base Charleston, MCRD Parris Island, Fort Jackson, Shaw AFB, MCAS Beaufort) means SC has a large veteran population, and veterans’ testimony has been particularly important for the PTSD-coverage advocacy.
• MS, ALS, and other progressive-disease patients.
• Parents of pediatric patients with autism, sickle-cell anemia, and other conditions on the qualifying-conditions list.

Marijuana Policy Project (MPP) Coordination

The Marijuana Policy Project (MPP) — the national organization — coordinates with SC patient advocates through Senior Policy Analyst Kevin Caldwell. MPP provides legislative tracking, model-bill drafting, and national-context expertise that SC patient-advocate organizations leverage. MPP has been the principal national-organization presence in SC cannabis-policy debate. See reform coalition page.

SC Pharmacy Association Alignment

The patient-advocacy coalition has been substantially strengthened by alignment with the South Carolina Pharmacy Association (SCPA), particularly Brian Clark, who has spoken in favor of the pharmacist-dispensing model in S.53. SCPA’s alignment with the patient-advocate position — rather than with the broader SC Medical Association, which has been more guarded — provides the bill with healthcare-professional credibility that pure patient testimony alone could not.

The Counter-Coalition

On the opposing side, SLED Chief Mark Keel, SC Sheriffs’ Association Executive Director Jarrod Bruder, and the House Family Caucus under Rep. McCravy have been the principal organized opposition to both Julian’s Law (in 2014, when SLED and SCSA were less aggressive) and the subsequent Compassionate Care Act campaigns. Keel’s framing — "this bill is about legalizing marijuana in South Carolina" — deliberately collapses the distinction the patient-advocate coalition has worked for a decade to establish. See opposition coalition page.

Practical Continuing Role of Julian’s Law

Julian’s Law itself remains in force at §§ 44-53-1810–1830, but its practical role has narrowed substantially:

• The 2018 federal Farm Bill legalized hemp-derived CBD nationally, providing access to most ordinary CBD products without Julian’s Law authorization.
• FDA approval of Epidiolex in 2018 made the principal use case — pediatric severe-epilepsy CBD therapy — available through standard pharmacy channels with insurance.
• Higher-THC formulations (above the 0.3% federal hemp threshold but below the 0.9% Julian’s Law threshold) are still authorized only under Julian’s Law for qualifying patients, though commercial availability through approved teaching hospitals remains constrained.

If S.53 is enacted, Julian’s Law would persist as a separate pathway alongside the broader medical-cannabis program. The narrow severe-epilepsy carve-out has more constitutional and statutory durability than its current practical utility might suggest.

Related on this site: Julian's Law as Affirmative Defense, Julian's Law (S.1035, Send a Message.