Editor's Note

1999 Act No. 125, Part VI, Section 23, subsections (B) and (E), provide as follows:

"(B) Article 9 of Chapter 22, Title 12, as added in PART III, SECTION 10, takes effect July 1, 1999 except that Sections 12-22-1020 and 12-22-1030 take effect when the remaining provisions of PART III take effect as provided in subsection (E). If the remaining provisions of PART III do not take effect as provided in subsection (E), then Article 9 of Chapter 22, Title 12 is repealed on the date that the State Board of Canvassers certifies a majority 'no' vote in the referendum provided in Part II of this act. Sections 12-22-730 and 12-22-740 and subsections (19) and (22) of Section 12-22-10, as added in Part III, SECTION 10, take effect June 1, 1999. If the remaining provisions of Part III do not take effect, then Sections 12-22-730 and 12-22-740 and subsections (19) and (22) of Section 12-22-10 are repealed on the date that the State Board of Canvassers certifies a majority 'no' vote in the referendum provided in Part II of this act;

"(E) If the State Board of Canvassers certifies a majority 'yes' vote in the referendum provided in Part II of this act, then Part I does not take effect, and the remaining provisions of Part III take effect on December 1, 1999 and SECTION 19 OF PART IV is repealed, except that the provisions of SECTION 21 shall apply to any pending civil actions brought under Section 12-21-2805.

In Joytime Distributors and Amusement Co., Inc., v. The State of South Carolina, 338 S.C. 634, 528 S.E.2d 647 (1999), the Supreme Court of South Carolina stated:

". . . we hold that in enacting Part II of Act 125, the General Assembly unconstitutionally delegated its power to enact the general law of this state and we invalidate Part II of the Act and enjoin the holding of the referendum. Since Part II of Act 125 is invalid, those portions of Part III of the Act which provide for regulation of the video gaming industry, contingent upon the referendum called for in Part II, are also invalid. . . ."

Further, the court stated:

"Joytime asserts, however, that certain provisions in Act 125 became effective on June 1 and July 1 of this year and are only repealed in the case of a majority 'no' vote; Act 125 contains no provision for their repeal without a referendum. . . . However, those provisions relate, in the interim, to registering machines, to the number of video machines which are located on any one premise, and to casinos. The provisions are not inconsistent with the intent of the legislature to ban video gaming on July 1, 2000. Should the legislature fail to repeal those provisions when it reconvenes, they will be repealed by necessary implication. . . ."

[Provisions to be repealed by necessary implication, effective July 1, 2000, include: Sections 12-22-10(19), 12-22-10(22), 12-22-730, 12-22-740, and all of Article 9, consisting of Sections 12-22-910 through 12-22-1080.]

See Section 12-21-2710, as amended by 1999 Act 125, Part I, Section 1, effective July 1, 2000.

__________