S.C. court upholds ban on video gambling

Dan Lewerenz

Wednesday, June 21, 2000 | 3:57 a.m.

COLUMBIA, S.C. - South Carolina's Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld a July 1 ban on video gambling, rejecting the industry's arguments that it should be declared unconstitutional.

The ban, which was put into place by a previous Supreme Court ruling, was challenged by two operators who said it was unconstitutional for the state to take away their livelihood by banning the games.

The state said it was only denying permits for the games to operate in South Carolina and they could be moved to another state.

"The people of South Carolina wanted the plug pulled on video gambling, the Legislature then stepped up and banned it, and the Supreme Court has now upheld the legislative will," said Attorney General Charlie Condon.

"We want this decision to be the final nail in the coffin of the video gambling industry," he said.

Attorneys for the plaintiffs, Westside Quick Shop of Greenville and Winners Pot of Gold Hot Spot of Hartsville, did not return calls from The Associated Press Wednesday night seeking comment.

The Supreme Court, at Condon's request, took over the lawsuit from Circuit Court, where it originally filed. The five justices issued their unanimous opinion without hearing any oral arguments in the case.

The Legislature passed the ban last year, but gave voters the right to decide in a referendum planned for this past November whether the games should remain legal.

The Supreme Court, however, blocked the referendum, saying the Legislature could not delegate its power, but kept in place the part of the law that banned the games as of this July 1.

In the opinion issued Wednesday, the justices said the $3 billion a year industry had plenty of time to get rid of the machines. "During this time, plaintiffs owning video gambling machines have been free to profitably dispose of them out of state," Associate Justice James E. Moore wrote for the court.

Attorneys for the plaintiffs had argued it was not that easy to relocate the machines and said the state's position led "to the shocking suggestion that the state may deny constitutional rights to its citizens by sending them in a forced migration to some other jurisdiction where such rights are protected."

Moore disputed that notion in his opinion, saying that courts have long upheld the power of the state to determine take seize illegal gambling machines, "and we have consistently deferred to the legislature's determination of what gaming devices must be sacrificed for the public welfare."

Moore said the forfeiture is legal "even when applied to machines that were previously lawfully possessed."

The ruling was not unexpected. "I don't think anyone's all that surprised by the decision," said Morton Brilliant, a spokesman for Gov. Jim Hodges. "This didn't really change anything. We're where we were before."

Mike Fletcher, president of Drews Distributing, a gambling machine distribution company in Spartanburg, said video gambling operators were "preparing to go out of business in the next two weeks, based on the people I've talked to." Fletcher's company was not involved in the litigation.