Could South Carolina magistrate jury lists include licensed drivers who were not registered voters in 2012?

Plain-English summary

In 2012, the South Carolina Attorney General revisited a 1989 opinion that had limited magistrate jury lists to registered voters. A later legislative amendment had changed the source list: the State Election Commission was to compile magistrate lists under the same provision that merged registered voters with eligible licensed drivers and identification-cardholders. The AG therefore overruled the earlier view and concluded the magistrate list should include qualifying license and ID holders even if they were not registered voters. The opinion’s quoted statute limited inclusion to drivers and ID holders eligible to register to vote and required efforts to remove duplicates and disqualified names.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2012. 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 a person have to be registered to vote to appear on a magistrate jury list? A: Under the 2012 opinion, no. A qualifying driver’s license or identification card could place a person on the list.

Q: Did every license holder automatically qualify?
A: No. The cited provision limited the merged list to license and ID holders eligible to register to vote.

Q: Why did the AG change its earlier view?
A: A 2004 amendment expressly linked magistrate jury lists to the merged voter-and-DMV list used for circuit juries.

Q: What happened to the AG’s 1989 opinion?
A: The 2012 opinion overruled its registered-voters-only conclusion because the statute had changed.

Background and statutory framework

The Election Commission’s magistrate list had once been based on qualified electors. The AG compared that former wording with the later amendment and the separate provision governing the merged jury roll.

Citations and references

The opinion analyzed the magistrate-jury and circuit-jury source-list provisions and the 2004 amendment.

Official title

Asking whether the list of eligible jurors which the State Election Commission furnishes the chief magistrates pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. §22-2-50 must include the names of individuals holding South Carolina driver’s licenses or identification cards who are not also registered voters.

Requester

Bobby M. Bowers, Director, Division of Research and Statistics, SC Budget and Control Board

Source

• Landing page: https://www.scag.gov/opinions/opinions-archive/september-4-2012/
• Original PDF: https://www.scag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/bowers-b-m-os-9488-9-4-12-magistrate-jury-pools.pdf

Original opinion text

ALAN WILSON
ATIORNEY GENERAL

September 4, 2012

Bobby M. Bowers, Director
Divis ion of Research and Statistics
S.C. Budget and Control Board
I 000 Assembly Street, Ste. 425
Columbia, SC 2920 I
Dear Director Bowers:
We received your letter asking whether the list of eligible jurors which the State Election Commission furnishes the chief magistrates pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. §22-2-50 must include the names of individuals holding South Carolina driver's licenses or identification cards who are not also registered voters. Because you reference a prior opinion of this Office dated December 5, 1989, wherein we responded to a similar question, we will treat your inquiry as a request to revisit or overrule the 1989 opinion. This Office recognizes a long-standing rule that we will not set aside or vacate Office opinions unless we find them to have been erroneously decided at the time of issuance or we believe that subsequent events dictate that the opinion should be modified. See Ops. S.C. Attv. Gen., April 18, 2011; October 3, 1986. At the time of the 1989 opinion, §22-2-50 provided that the State Election Commission provide chief magistrates in each COUnty With II ••• a precinct-by-precinct list Of qualified electors residing Within the county. The chief magistrate for administration of the county shall use such lists in preparing, for each Ju ry Area, a list of the qualified electors therein and shall forward these lists to the respective magistrates." Section 14-7-130 set forth the procedure for the State Election Commission to provide county jury commissioners with a list of individuals eligible to serve as jurors. We noted that § 14-7-130, which mandated that the jury list be composed of names of registered voters and licensed drivers and identification cardholders who are residents of a pa11icular county, is applicable on ly to jurors for the circu it cou11. In reaching this conclusion , we· relied upon the Title to 1988 S.C. Acts No. 453, which specified the applicability of§ 14-7- 130 to the circuit com1s. We thus detennined the list of eligible jurors wh ich the State Election Comm ission furnishes the chief magistrates pursuant to §22-2-50 should not include the names of persons holding state driver's licenses or identification cards who are not also registered voters. We concluded that "[t]o be eligible to serve as a juror in a magistrate's court pursuant to Section 22-2-50, an individual must be a registered voter." See State v. Black, 319 S.C. 515, 462 S.E.2d 31 1 ( 1995) [citing the 1989 opinion with approval].

R EMBERT

c. DENNIS B UILDING • POST OFFICE Box 11549 • COLUMBIA, SC 29211 - 1549 • TELEPHONE 803-734-3970 • FACSIMILE 803-253-6283

Director Bowers
Page 2
September 4, 2012

However, since the issuance of our 1989 opinion, the Legislature amended §22-2-50 in 2004 S.C . Acts. No. 304. Pursuant to the amendment, §22-2-50 now provides that:
[i]n October of each year, the State Election Commission must provide to the chief magistrate for administration of each county, at no cost, ~ .ll!.n'. list compiled in accordance with the provisions of Section 14-7-130. The chief magistrate for administration of the county must use these lists in preparing, for each jury area, a list of the qualified electors in these jury areas, and must forward these lists to the respective magistrates. [Emphasis added]. Significantly, we note the Title to Act 304 states, in part:
... TO AMEND SECTION 22-2-50, RELATING TO THE PREPARAT ION
OF A LIST OF QUALIFIED ELECTORS FOR EACH MAGISTERIAL JURY
AREA, SO AS TO REQUIRE THE LIST BE PREPARED IN OCTOBER OF
EACH YEAR, DELETE THE REQUIREMENT THE LIST BE PREPARED
ON A PRECINCT BY PRECINCT BASIS, AND REQUIRE IT BE
COMPILED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION
14-7-130 .. . [Emphasis added] .
The Title to this Act is specific in stating that jury lists in magistrate courts must be compiled in accordance with § 14-7-130; that is, jury lists must be composed of names of registered voters and licensed drivers and identification cardholders. 1 The cardinal rule of statutory interpretation is to ascertain 1 Section 14-7-130, amended several times since our 1989 opinion, provides that:

[i]n September of each year, the Department of Motor Vehicles shall furnish the State Election Commission an electronic file of the name, address, date of birth, social security number, sex, and race of persons who are over the age of eighteen years and citizens of the United States residing in each county who hold a valid South Carolina driver's license or an identification card issued pursuant to Section 56-1-3350. The electronic file also must include persons who have obtained a valid South Carolina driver's license or identification card during the previous year and exclude persons whose driver's license or identification card has not been renewed or has been invalidated by judicial or administrative action. In October of each year, the State Election Commission shall furnish a jury list to county jury commissioners consisting of a file or list derived by merging the list of registered voters in the county with county residents appearing on the file furnished by the department, but only those licensed drivers and identification cardholders who are eligible to register to vote may be included in the list. Before furnishing the list, the commission must make every effort to eliminate duplicate names and names of persons disqualified from registering to vote or voting pursuant to the laws and Constitution of this State. As furnished to the jury commissioners by the State Election Commission, the list or file constitutes the roll of eligible jurors in the

Director Bowers
Page 3
September 4, 2012

and effectuate the legislative intent whenever possible. Burns v. State Farm Mutual Auto Ins. Co., 297 S.C. 520, 377 S.E. 2d 569 ( 1989). Moreover, when interpreting a statute, the legislative intent must prevail if it can be reasonably discovered in the language used which must be construed in light of the intended purpose of the statute. Gambrell v. Travelers Insurance Companies, 280 S.C. 69, 310 S.E.2d 14 ( 1984). Also, South Carolina couits consider the title or caption of an act in aid of construction to show the intent of the Legislature. Lindsay v. Southern Fann Bureau Cas. Ins. Co., 258 S.C. 272, 188 S.E.2d 3 74 ( 1972); University of South Carolina v. Elliott, 248 S.C. 218, 149 S.E.2d 433 ( 1966). The statement in the Title to Act No. 304 is quite clear in specifying the applicability of § 14-7-130 to the magistrate courts. Because of the amendment to §22-2-50 and the very clear intent of the Legislature, we are inclined to overrule our 1989 opinion. Pursuant to §22-2-50, it is the opinion of this Office that the provisions of§ 14-7-130, mandating the jury list compiled by the State Election Commission be composed of names of registered voters and licensed drivers and identification cardholders, is applicable to jurors for a magistrate's court. Accordingly, the list of eligible jurors which the State Election Commission furnishes the chief magistrates should include the names of persons holding state driver's licenses or identification cards or who are registered voters.

If you have any fu1ther questions, please advise.
Very trul~~ou~s, /

--·~t/P
N. Mark Rapoport
Senior Assistant Attorney General
REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY:

~[;,~

Robert D. Cook
Deputy Attorney General

county. Expenses of the Depaitment of Motor Vehicles and the State Election Commission in implementing this section must be borne by these agencies.