Who could choose between two groups claiming to lead the same South Carolina political party?

Plain-English summary

The State Election Commission had received competing convention notices and officer lists from two groups each claiming to lead the Patriot Party of South Carolina. Both intended to submit candidate names. The Attorney General pointed to the statutory steps for party organization, precinct clubs and conventions, but said it could not determine which faction had complied because that required factual analysis.

The letter said one faction might be able to make a clear initial showing to the Election Commission. Otherwise, the factions might need a court to determine which was properly certified. The opinion did not award the party name or ballot authority to either claimant.

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 pick the real Patriot Party chairman?
A: No. It said selecting the proper faction required facts outside the scope of an AG opinion.

Q: Could both factions independently organize under the same party name?
A: The letter said only one political party could be organized under that name and pointed to statutory precinct-club and convention rules.

Q: What if the factions could not establish which one complied?
A: The opinion said they might have to take the factual dispute to court.

Background and statutory framework

The letter applied the statutory sequence for reorganizing a party and nominating candidates. It treated compliance with those steps as the central issue, while refusing to resolve the disputed facts itself.

Citations and references

• § 7-9-10, a party organization provision quoted in the letter.
• § 7-9-30, the one-club-per-precinct provision quoted in the letter.

Official title

Reviewing the Patriot Party and a listing of the party officers.

Requester

Mr. James F. Hendrix, Executive Director, South Carolina Election Commission

Source

• Landing page: https://www.scag.gov/opinions/opinions-archive/july-2-1998/
• Original PDF: https://www.scag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/98july2hendrix.pdf

Original opinion text

The State of South Carolina

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
CHARLES M. CONDON
ATTORNEY GENERAL

July 2, 1998

I
I

Mr. James F. Hendrix
Executive Director
South Carolina Election Commission
P. 0. Box 5987
Columbia, SC
29250
Dear Jim:

L
I

I am in receipt of your recent letter. You have stated that on January 7, 1998, your office received notice of a state convention held by the Patriot Party of South Carolina and a listing of party officers. This notice was forwarded to you by Scott Grubell who stated he was Chairman of the Party. Subsequently you received from Wayne Griffin a notice of a state convention for the Patriot Party and a different list of officers. Mr. Griffin further identified himself as the Party Chairman of the Patriot Party. Both groups apparently intend to give you the names of candidates to be placed on the general election ballot and both groups claim to be the official representative of the Patriot Party. Although you state that you recognize that an intra party dispute is not within the purview of the State Election Commission to resolve, you have inquired if our Office can provide any guidance on this question. Section 7-9-10, et seq. of the S.C. Code set out the statutorily prescribed requirements for re-organizing political parties and the holding of county and state conventions. A political party must be certified by the State Election Commission and only one political party can be organized under that name. S.C. Code Ann.,
§ 7-9-10
(1997).
Once organized only "[o] ne party club may be organized in each . . . voting precinct . . . . S.C. Code Ann., § 7-9-30 (1997) (emphasis added). A re-organization meeting of the club, called prior to a general election, is called for

~ REMUERT

c. DE.~IS BUILDING

titud "'\t--m,

•

PnsT OFl'ICE Box 11549

•

COUJMl!J,\, S.C. 29211-1549

•

Tl'l.El'llONE: 80.1-714-1970

•

FACSIMILE: 80J-25J-628J

Mr. James F. Hendrix
Page 2
July 2, 1998

. the usual place of meeting, at the time and on the day as determined by the county committee no later than two weeks prior to the county convention. S.C. Code Ann.,

§

7-9-50 (1997).

The succeeding Code sections set out specific requirements and times for events to transpire that lead up to the state convention and the nomination of candidates.

I
I

It is clear from these provisions that only one of the Patriot's Party factions that have certified candidates to you could have met these time tables and specific statutory requirements. However, it would take a factual analysis to make this determination. This Office cannot make such a factual determination. It may be that one of the factions can clearly set out a prima facie showing to your office's satisfaction that they are the proper party. However, if this is not the case it is possible that the two factions of the party will need to present this issue to a court for a factual determination as to which faction is the properly certified party. This letter is an informal opinion. It has been written by and represents the opinion of the undersigned attorney as to the specific question asked. It has not, however, been personally reviewed by the Attorney General nor officially published in the manner of a formal opinion. Sincerely yours,

~/'....<...>~

I

Treva G. Ashworth
Deputy Attorney General

f?ll

TGA/rho