Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sweepstakes Bill topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House Judiciary Committee gives favorable report to bill aimed at closing sweepstakes-machine loophole
Summary
The committee advanced Senate Bill 3 to clarify that sweepstakes exceptions do not legalize electronic gambling machines; Rep. Rutherford’s amendment to bind magistrate rulings to law enforcement was tabled 14–6 after extended debate over selective enforcement.
The House Judiciary Committee on an announced agenda advanced Senate Bill 3, known as the sweepstakes bill, which lawmakers said is intended to close a loophole some operators use to justify electronic gambling machines.
“The only bill from the constitutional law subcommittee is senate 3, which is known as the sweepstakes bill,” Mr. Bannister said in opening the item, telling the panel the bill had passed the Senate and was considered necessary after testimony from the attorney general’s office and the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division (SLED). Bannister said the measure clarifies that the statutory sweepstakes exception does not create an allowance for electronic gambling devices.
Rep. Rutherford offered an amendment to make a magistrate-court determination that a machine is permissible binding on law enforcement until reversed on appeal, arguing that current practice allows law enforcement to “judge shop” and repeatedly seize machines even after a magistrate rules they are legal. Rutherford said, “once the once a magistrate court determines that the machine is permissible under the code, then that decision is binding on law enforcement.”
Opponents questioned whether the amendment would be relevant because the bill itself would make the targeted machines illegal. After debate over the amendment’s effect and examples of selective enforcement, the committee voted to table the Rutherford amendment by a division vote of 14–6.
The committee then approved a favorable report on S.3. The chair announced the bill received a favorable report by a vote of 14 to 6.
The committee’s action sends the bill (and the record of the tabling vote and amendment debate) onward in the legislative process. Committee members said the bill’s purpose is statutory clarity: to prevent operators from relying on sweepstakes language to deploy electronic gambling machines in establishments that law enforcement contends are operating unlawful devices.
