|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
by WILL FOLKS
***
South Carolina’s so-called “Republican” supermajority wields exclusive control over a government-run gambling monopoly… or does it?
Certain GOP leaders like to think they’re still holding all the cards, but recent events appear to be overtaking the Palmetto State’s historic prohibition on private sector gaming – creating a landscape of uncertainty, unfairness and uneven enforcement.
What sort of concrete, cohesive policy should be adopted to address this amorphousness? That’s the problem: state lawmakers don’t seem to have a clue.
While hypocritical evangelicals (and their purchased, partisan hacks) continue cracking down on specific gaming options perceived to threaten their guaranteed revenue streams, other enterprises are flourishing under the new nebulousness.
What’s legal? What isn’t? And who decides the difference?
Into this opacity has stepped a new entity called “SC Citizens for Equal Enforcement of Gambling Laws.” Formed last month, this coalition of small business owners is represented by prominent Palmetto State defense attorney Jim Griffin. On its behalf, Griffin recently filed a lawsuit in U.S. district court against Dave & Busters, a popular Texas-based arcade chain with locations in Columbia, Greenville and Myrtle Beach, S.C.
***
Per that action (.pdf), these businesses insist Dave & Busters is operating “unlawful redemption gaming machines” at all three of its Palmetto State locations – machines which “permit patrons to deposit money for the purpose of trying to ‘win’ more by playing games of skill or chance.”
These games are “precisely the type of machines prohibited by South Carolina law,” according to the pleading.
Games of skill or chance in which players invest money for the opportunity to win “something of value” currently qualify as gambling under the S.C. Code of Laws (§ 12-21-2710). This statute, the lawsuit argued, has been expressly interpreted by the courts as prohibiting “gaming machines that attract players to deposit money for the purpose of trying to ‘win’ more, whether by skill or chance.”
Dave & Busters operates numerous such machines, the pleading contends.
Legislation (H. 4129) was introduced last year seeking to clarify this statute – noting that a citizen who “pays a fee to participate in a game, activity, or event in which skill predominates over chance… and receives a thing of value proportionate to how skillfully he plays in the game, activity, or event” is not participating in gambling.
***
***
This bill overwhelmingly cleared the S.C. House of Representatives on March 7, 2025, but has been stalled in the S.C. Senate judiciary committee ever since.
According to the lawsuit, Dave & Busters is in clear violation of the current law.
“The prizes available at defendant’s in-store redemption centers include high-value electronics and consumer goods,” the lawsuit stated. “This ‘opportunity to win’ constitutes gambling under South Carolina law, and defendant is therefore the ‘winner’ of gambling losses sustained by patrons.”
Among other demands, the pleading seeks to compel Dave & Busters to reimburse customers who lost more than $50 playing such games at its three South Carolina locations.
Griffin said the small businesses he represents “formed a company to bring attention to the unequal enforcement of the gambling laws against locally owned restaurants and bars,” alleging a climate exists in which the S.C. State Law Enforcement Division (SLED) and other police agencies are allowed to “unfairly and selectively” enforce the law.
“SLED, and other law enforcement agencies, have seized video games, revoked beer and wine licenses, and have threatened criminal cases against local businesses for operating video games like the ones at the Dave & Buster’s locations in South Carolina,” Griffin said.
***
RELATED | GOVERNOR CANDIDATES ADDRESS GAMING
***
Griffin’s lawsuit is likely to place additional pressure on lawmakers to revisit the gambling issue – as their current approach of keeping their heads buried in the sand no longer seems tenable.
Frankly, lawmakers should have been on top of this issue years ago (as we repeatedly urged them to do).
“This website has consistently argued in favor of breaking up (government’s gaming) monopoly – which has been zealously guarded (at the expense of jobs, investment and revenue) by Republican leaders,” I wrote a decade ago, urging a blanket removal of the state’s gambling prohibition.
A decade later, though, these same so-called “Republicans” are still zealously protecting their government-run racket – even as the leader of their party (a former casino magnate) is leading the charge in the opposite direction. South Carolina’s increasingly antiquated, anti-competitive prohibitions are not only costing our state jobs, investment and opportunity – they are ill-defined and inherently unfair (as this lawsuit demonstrates).
Businesses are suffering… and as government inflicts that suffering to preserve is poorly-run lottery, it is also wasting scarce law enforcement and legal resources on the uneven application of its hazy statutes.
Anti-gaming lawmakers have been content to kill reform by procedural rules because they’re afraid to have the S.C. General Assembly vote on this issue – but their ongoing obstructionism is falling further behind the times.
It’s time for them to catch up… or continue to be overrun.
***
THE LAWSUIT…
(U.S. District Court)
***
ABOUT THE AUTHOR…
Will Folks is the founding editor of the news outlet you are currently reading. Prior to founding FITSNews, he served as press secretary to the governor of South Carolina. He lives in the Midlands region of the state with his wife and eight children.
***
WANNA SOUND OFF?
Got something you’d like to say in response to one of our articles? Or an issue you’d like to address proactively? We have an open microphone policy! Submit your letter to the editor (or guest column) via email HERE. Got a tip for a story? CLICK HERE. Got a technical question or a glitch to report? CLICK HERE.
