COLUMBIA, S.C. — The state attorney general is asking the South Carolina Supreme Court to throw out a lawsuit regarding a proposed mask mandate at the University of South Carolina.
South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson files his response to a suit last week by a USC professor Richard Crenwick and the law office of his attorney, State Senator Dick Harpootlian. He said the petition doesn't have merit and should be ignored.
The situation began back on July 30, when USC announced they'd be requiring masks in all buildings on campus to help stop the spread of COVID-19. But three days later, Wilson sent a letter to Interim USC President Harris Pastides saying the mask mandate violated a state budget proviso that he believes bars requiring face coverings on campus. Pastides quickly changed course, announcing masks would only be strongly encouraged for the upcoming semester.
But Crenwick disagreed, and asked the high court to intervene and state that the attorney general's thinking was flawed. Crenwick also said the mask rule is necessary and protects himself, students, and his immunocompromised wife.
The crux of the of the dispute is over the Proviso 117.190, passed by state lawmakers in June, which states the following:
"A public institution of higher learning, including a technical college, may not use any funds appropriated or authorized pursuant to this act to require that its students have received the COVID-19 vaccination in order to be present at the institution's facilities without being required to wear a facemask. This prohibition extends to the announcement or enforcement of any such policy."
Crenwick felt the proviso can be read only one way---that it prohibits discrimination against students who are unvaccinated, not that it bans mask rules altogether. But Wilson rejects that, saying it was the lawmaker's intent to stop enforced masking, although Wilson admits the proviso is poorly worded, leading to some alternate interpretations.
As evidence for his argument, Wilson points to other provisos passed in the state budget this year that prohibit mask mandates in public schools and mandating the vaccine.
He also said even if the Supreme Court gave an opinion in Crenwick's favor, it doesn't compel USC would then impose a mask mandate, as Crenshaw wants, meaning there is no case or controversy for the justices to decide.
It's unclear if the justices will take up the petition for discussion.