Was a charity poker tournament legal in South Carolina if admission was voluntary and no prizes were awarded?

Plain-English summary

In 2007, the South Carolina Attorney General considered a charity event promoted as a Texas hold’em tournament and “poker challenge.” The requester said admission donations were voluntary, no alcohol would be served, and no cash or prizes would be awarded. The AG concluded that the event nevertheless appeared to violate state law as an illegal card game. He relied on earlier opinions treating poker at charitable events as prohibited by South Carolina’s gambling statutes.

The AG also noted a pending declaratory judgment action concerning poker in the state and said the issue was not final until a court ruled.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2007. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Did the absence of prizes make the charity poker challenge lawful in this opinion? A: No. The AG concluded that the event, advertised as a poker challenge, appeared to be an illegal game of cards even though the requester said there would be no cash or prizes.

Q: Did voluntary admission donations change the AG's conclusion? A: No. The opinion described the donation as suggested and unnecessary for admission, yet still concluded that the poker challenge appeared to violate state law.

Q: Was the poker issue settled when the opinion was issued? A: No. The AG said a declaratory judgment action concerning poker was pending and that the issue was not final until a court ruled.

Background and statutory framework

The opinion cited South Carolina's restrictions on unlawful card games, gambling tables, and betting or wagers. It also cited earlier AG opinions concluding that charitable poker games violated those restrictions. Its conclusion was expressly qualified by the pending court action.

Citations and references

Statutes: S.C. Code Ann. §§ 16-19-40, 16-19-50, 16-19-130.

Cases: Holliday v. Governor of the State of South Carolina et al., 78 F.Supp. 918 (1948); Army-Navy Bingo, Garrison No. 2196 v. Plowden, 281 S.C. 226, 314 S.E.2d 339 (1984).

Source

• Landing page: https://www.scag.gov/opinions/opinions-archive/april-23-2007-2/
• Original PDF: https://www.scag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/scarborough-w-b-4-23-07-os-8380-Holy-City-charity-poker-challenge.pdf

Original opinion text

April 23, 2007

The Honorable Wallace B. Scarborough
Member, House of Representatives
306-C Blatt Building
Columbia, South Carolina 29211
Dear Representative Scarborough:
In a letter to this office you referenced a pending Holy City Charity Poker Challenge being promoted by a radio station in Charleston. As to the circumstances involved, you indicated that no alcohol would be served, no cash or prizes would be given out, admission is a suggested donation to charity and is not required for admission. You further stated that the charity stands to make about
$10,000.00 from the event and the same event was held last year. According to your letter, “[a]ll they want to do is play cards and raise a lot of money for charity.” While you stated that “no gambling whatsoever will take place during that evening”, according to a newspaper article on the event, the game is billed as an open Texas hold’em tournament with proceeds going to charity. As set forth by the game itself, the event is advertised as a “poker challenge”. Prior opinions of this office dated November 1, 2006 and February 2, 2006 have recognized that statutory enactments prohibit various forms of playing with cards and dice, gambling and gambling devices in this State. See, e.g., S.C. Code Ann. §§ 16-19-40 (unlawful games, including games with cards or dice, and betting); 16-19-50 (keeping unlawful gaming tables); 16-19-130 (betting or wagers prohibited). In an opinion dated May 4, 2005 it was specifically referenced that
…S.C. Code Ann. § 16-19-40...prohibits any person from playing “…at any tavern, inn, store for the retailing of spiritous liquors or in any house used as a place of gaming, barn, kitchen, stable or other outhouse, street, highway, open wood, race field, or open place at (a) any game with cards or dice…. (emphasis added). This Office has consistently concluded that the game of poker is prohibited even when conducted by charitable organizations during events such as a “Monte Carlo night”. In an opinion dated April 13, 1984 it was determined that games such as poker played at a “Monte Carlo night” violate the various gambling statutes, including § 16-19-40. The 1984 opinion cited Holliday v. Governor of the State of South Carolina et al., 78 F.Supp. 918 (1948), affd. 335 U.S. 803 (1948) which “…recognizes that it is the

The Honorable Wallace B. Scarborough
Page 2
April 23, 2007
public policy of the State of South Carolina to suppress gambling and that gambling in all forms is illegal in South Carolina.” Another prior opinion of this office dated August 3, 2000 referenced the decision in Army-Navy Bingo, Garrison No. 2196 v. Plowden, 281 S.C. 226, 228, 314 S.E.2d 339, 340 (1984) as indicating that “[t]here is no fundamental right to gamble, and the State’s power to suppress it is practically unrestrained.” Referencing the above, in the opinion of this office the Holy City Charity Poker Challenge being promoted by a radio station in Charleston would appear to be violative of State law as an illegal game of cards. As set forth by the game itself, the event is advertised as a “poker challenge” and, therefore, would constitute illegal gambling. While such constitutes the opinion of this office, I would only add that there is a declaratory judgment action regarding the playing of poker in this State that is presently pending. Until a court rules, the issue is not final. With kind regards, I am, Very truly yours, Henry McMaster Attorney General

By:

REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY:

______
Robert D. Cook
Assistant Deputy Attorney General

Charles H. Richardson
Senior Assistant Attorney General