Looking again at South Carolina's drinking age law

The drinking age in South Carolina has been 21 for more than 25 years.

There’s a good reason. The law makes it harder for minors to drink in the state, holding retailers, parents and underage drinkers responsible for their actions.

To us, 21 represents the safest solution to the problem of alcohol abuse. There’s a disproportionate number teens involved in fatal crashes.

We oppose any effort to allow the age to drop back to 18.

Yes, we understand anyone 18 can go to war, buy a house, possess a handgun or vote.

But alcohol is viewed differently, as specified by the state constitution.

Now comes word of two legal challenges to the drinking age. Magistrates in Richland and Aiken counties have ruled the law prohibiting people 18 to 20 from drinking is unconstitutional.

The magistrates based their decisions on a State Supreme Court ruling last year, which struck down state law banning 18- to 20-year-olds from possessing handguns. If it’s legal for them to carry handguns, why not drink alcohol?

In South Carolina, a magistrate’s ruling is not binding in any other county. Municipal judges and magistrates are the lowest-level courts.

The two cases, however, may or may not be appealed. If one of them is appealed, it would advance the issue further into the court system. At some point, a case will be heard by a higher court.

Here’s the problem in keeping the drinking age at 21. The state constitution reads: “Every citizen who is 18 years of age or older ... shall be ... endowed with full legal rights and responsibilities, provided that the General Assembly may restrict the sale of alcoholic beverages to persons until age 21.”

In 2008, the Supreme Court rule the section to allow people 18 to 20 to possess handguns. The court said the constitution does not restrict anything else except alcohol.

Not so fast, some in the legal community say. The constitution refers to the sale of alcohol, not the possession of it. That loophole allowed two lawyers to win lower-court cases in South Carolina and could spread as a defense across the state unless it’s closed.

For more than 20 years, every state has had laws either banning anyone younger than 21 from purchasing or publicly possessing alcohol. States were motivated by a federal threat to cut off highway funds.

States also were motivated with a list of consequences from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Drinking causes school problems (such as lower grades, discipline problems), legal problems (arrests for DUI), physical problems (hangovers or illnesses), increased sexual activity, higher risk for suicide and homicide, memory loss and death from alcohol poisoning.

To prevent even the remote chance of them increasing in South Carolina, perhaps the Legislature needs to change the state constitution and campaign for voter approval.

The constitution’s language should clearly include possession, rather than merely sale of alcohol.

— Unsigned editorials represent the views of this newspaper. Editorial Board members are Mark Laskowski (regional publisher), James Bennett (regional editor), Sam Bundy (sports editor), Kimberly Ginfrida (news editor), David Johnson (regional circulation director), Charles Tomlinson (Lake City News & Post editor) and Jackie Torok (metro editor).