AGO 91-20.

Case DateMarch 28, 1991
CourtSouth Carolina
South Carolina Attorney General Opinions 1991. AGO 91-20. 66March 28, 1991OPINION NO. 91-20(1) H. 3513, which provides for suspension or revocation of liquor licenses at locations which permit "bottomless entertainment" and prohibits such activity at locations which sell beer and wine, would most probably be upheld by a court as being consistent with the authority granted a state by the Twenty-First Amendment. (2) The Chippendolls decision, a trial court decision based on the facts before that court, should not be considered as controlling as to proposed legislation, H.3513.TO: Member, House of Representatives
FROM: Charles H. Richardson Assistant Attorney General
In a letter to this Office you raised several questions regarding proposed legislation, H.3513, which deals with "bottomless entertainment" at establishments which sell alcoholic beverages. As expressed in the title, such legislation amends Sections 61-5-60 and expressed in the title, such legislation amends Sections 61-5-60 and 61-9-410 which deal with the grounds for suspension, revocation or nonrenewal of a license to sell beer and wine so as to prohibit "bottomless entertainment" at premises licensed to sell alcoholic beverages. You asked whether the proposed legislation is constitutional or in conflict with existing relevant case law. You also questioned whether the "Chippendolls" decision, a case which arose in Richland County, would apply in situations addressed by the proposed legislation. In considering the constitutionality of an act of the General Assembly, it is presumed that the act is constitutional in all respects. Moreover, such an act will not be considered void unless its unconstitutionality is clear beyond any reasonable doubt. Thomas v. Macklen, 186 S.C. 290, 195 S.E. 539 (1937); Townsend v. Richland County, 190 S.C. 270, 2 S.E.2d 777 (1939). All doubts of constitutionality are generally resolved in favor of constitutionality. While this Office may comment upon potential constitutional problems, it is solely with the province of the courts of this state to declare an act unconstitutional. As referenced above, H.3513 provides for suspension or revocation of liquor licenses at locations which permit "bottomless entertainment" and prohibits such activity at locations which sell beer and wine. In several cases, the United States Supreme...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT