COLUMBIA — Voters could be asked in November whether a single word should change in the South Carolina constitution to specify that “only” citizens can vote — a revision Democrats called completely unnecessary.

They tried unsuccessfully to attach a question about abortion rights.

Sen. Chip Campsen, a co-sponsor, called the proposed amendment a “belt and suspenders approach” to guaranteeing there will never be a court ruling in South Carolina allowing noncitizens to vote.

The resolution, approved 40-3, calls for changing the state constitution’s guaranteed right to vote from “every” to “only a” citizen in South Carolina who’s at least 18 and properly registered.

While some cities around the country have allowed noncitizens to vote in local elections, Campsen repeatedly acknowledged it’s not an issue in South Carolina.

But he pointed to a ruling last August by the California Court of Appeals as to why the change is needed.

Interpreting a similar phrase in California’s constitution, the court upheld a San Francisco ordinance allowing noncitizen parents to vote in local school board elections, finding that a guarantee for “every” citizen didn’t exclude noncitizens. The conservative group that sued then dropped the case, calling a further appeal to the liberal California Supreme Court futile.

“This would remove all possibility that noncitizens could vote” in South Carolina should someone sue here in the future, said Campsen, R-Isle of Palms.

Sen. Darrell Jackson, D-Hopkins, scoffed at the idea of South Carolina justices taking their cues from California.

“What’s the likelihood?” he asked. “Like, zero?”

“Do I think it’s a big risk? No, I don’t,” Campsen responded. “This isn’t about where the South Carolina court is today but decades, maybe many decades, into the future, to make sure we never have such a decision.”

The question would be on the ballot in a presidential election year when illegal immigration is a top concern for voters across the country. Polls nationwide show voters disapprove of President Joe Biden’s handling of the border. Former President Donald Trump is expected to easily carry South Carolina.

So, the ballot question is unlikely to matter for who wins the top of the ticket in this GOP-ruled state.

What the Legislature should be asking voters, Democrats said, is whether the state constitution should provide a “limited right to an abortion.” Attempts during abortion debates over the last two years to let voters decide the issue were repeatedly rejected by Republicans in both chambers. Ultimately, a law that bans abortions at roughly six weeks into pregnancy took effect last August.

Unlike in other states, a voter-led referendum is not an option in South Carolina. Only supermajority approval by both chambers of the Legislature can put a constitutional question on November’s ballot.

Knowing her attempt would be knocked down, Margie Bright Matthews said it was worth trying again.

“The women in South Carolina deserve to have their voices heard,” said the Walterboro Democrat, naming other states that put an abortion question on the ballot. “South Carolina, come on. What are you afraid of? The truth?”

As she predicted, her attempt was ruled out of order as not related to the original legislation.

The only senators to vote against the resolution were Matthews, Mia McLeod, I-Columbia; and Tomeika Issac Devine, D-Columbia.

SC Daily Gazette Seanna Adcox contributed to this report.
Originally posted here