Could South Carolina call a teacher credential a license instead of a certificate in 1998?

Plain-English summary

The State Board of Education chair asked whether teacher credentials could be called licenses instead of certificates. The Attorney General agreed that the terms could be interchangeable for that purpose, assuming the state proposed corresponding changes to the statutes rather than changing only education regulations.

The letter said the legislation should state the authority conferred by the new "license" at least as clearly as the existing provisions did for a certificate. If the change was meant to leave that authority intact, the AG suggested saying so in the proposed statutory text. This was an informal response about terminology in 1998.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1998. 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 AG treat license and certificate as interchangeable for teacher credentials?
A: Yes, provided the statutory provisions were changed consistently with the terminology.

Q: Could the Board change only regulations and leave the statutes using certificate?
A: The letter's concurrence expressly assumed statutory changes, not a regulations-only substitution.

Q: Did the opinion say a renamed credential should have different powers?
A: No. It said any intended continuity in the credential's authority should be expressed in the proposed legislation.

Background and statutory framework

The request identified the teacher certification provision in § 59-26-30(7). The AG referred to the Department of Education's counsel, dictionary and case authorities on the terms, and the need to describe a credential's authority in statutory language.

Citations and references

• § 59-26-30(7), the teacher credential provision identified in the letter.

Official title

Advising as to whether the term license is synonymous with the term certificate so as to be a substitute for the latter term in the teacher certification process.

Requester

The Honorable J. Alex Stanton, IV, Chair, South Carolina State Board of Education

Source

• Landing page: https://www.scag.gov/opinions/opinions-archive/april-6-1998-2/
• Original PDF: https://www.scag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/98april6stanton.pdf

Original opinion text

The State of South Carolina

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
CHARLES Mrn.O,'JY Co:-mo'.
ATTOR:\EY GE'.ERAL

April 6, 1998

I
I

The Honorable J. Alex Stanton, IV, Chair

i~~~hR~~f~~~~a 8 ~1~~~n~oard of Education

Columbia, SC 29201
(Also by fax 734-4384)
Dear Mr. Stanton:

You have requested the advice of this Off ice as to whether the term license is synonymous with the term certificate so as to be a substitute for the latter term in the teacher certification process. See s.c. Code Ann. § 59-26-30 (7) (Supp. 1997). The Office of General Counsel at the Department of Education has advised you that the terms appear to be interchangeable for this purpose. I concur in that conclusion assuming that, for consistency, you are contemplating proposing changes in the statutory provisions for the teaching credentials rather than changing only the related regulations. See Hahn v. State, 322 P. 2d 896, 899 (WY 1958); Wilkie v. City of Chicago, 58 N. E. 1004, 1007 (IL 1900); Black's Law Dictionary, "certificate' and "license"; §1-23-310 (3) (Supp. 1997). In making any such changes, the extent of the authority conferred by the "license" should be set forth in the statute at least to the extent that it is now for certificates. If you do not intend to change the authority conferred by the former "certificate", I also suggest that you make that statement in the proposed statutory changes. This letter is an informal opinion. It has been written by the designated Assistant Deputy Attorney General and represents the opinion of the undersigned attorney as to the specific questions asked. It has not, however, been personally reviewed by the Attorney General nor officially published in the manner of a formal opinion.

The Honorable J. Alex Stanton, IV, Chair April 6, 1998 Page 2

If you have further questions, please let me know.

General
JESjr
CC:

I

f;I

ii

George C. Leventis, General Counsel