#JustinBamberg

, , , , , ,

Rep. Bamberg Requests Legal Opinion on GOP Abortion Ban

Yesterday, in a letter delivered to Attorney General Alan Wilson, Representative Bamberg of District 90 formally requested the office’s legal opinion on the constitutionality of H. 3020, dubbed as the “fetal heartbeat bill.”

In the letter that was also delivered to Governor Henry McMaster, House Speaker Jay Lucas, and Senate President Harvey Peeler, Representative Bamberg additionally requested an analysis of the bill’s potential cost in time and tax dollars to South Carolinians should it pass the Senate and, ultimately, be challenged in court.

H. 3020 would effectively end most abortions in the state of South Carolina as it bans all those that occur after the detection of a fetal heartbeat, something that can be found as early as five or six weeks into pregnancy.

Currently, H. 3020 sits in the Senate, but Governor Henry McMaster has made clear his intention to sign the bill should it pass.

Legislators and legal scholars on both sides have dismissed the bill as nothing more than a Republican charade meant to target Roe v. Wade and hinder a woman’s constitutional right to choose.

This move by Representative Bamberg is the latest Democratic effort to fight for the bodily autonomy of some of the state’s most vulnerable citizens, particularly poor women and women of color.

Read Representative Bamberg’s full letter below.

Dear Attorney General Wilson, 

I respectfully and formally request that your office conduct a constitutional analysis of H. 3020, the “South Carolina Fetal Heartbeat Protection from Abortion Act,” currently before the South Carolina Senate and provide a written opinion for consideration. 

Given the continued deliberation on this subject, many South Carolinians have expressed concern as to whether this legislation is in violation of a woman’s constitutional right to choose.

This legal precedent was established by the Supreme Court of the United States over 47 years ago in Roe v. Wade, reaffirmed 28 years ago in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, and it is my understanding that this holding by our nation’s highest court is still the law of the land. 

I commend the Office of the Attorney General for its work in monitoring the federal government, including its recent analysis of the constitutionality of the impeachment proceedings against President Donald Trump. I have no doubt that your office is fully capable of also conducting an equally thorough analysis of H. 3020 so that members of the South Carolina General Assembly may make a legally informed decision on this important issue – which directly impacts the lives of South Carolinians. 

As Governor McMaster has indicated that he would sign this bill should it pass the General Assembly, I believe it would be most prudent for the legislature to withhold taking further action on the bill until we receive the official legal opinion of the Office of the Attorney General.

By copy of this letter, delivered to President Peeler, I am humbly requesting that the Senate refrain from further consideration of this bill until the formal legal opinion/analysis has been comprehensively rendered and reported by the Office of the Attorney General. I share the concerns of my colleagues in the General Assembly over the efficacy and expense of passing H. 3020.

Similar bills have recently been enacted into law by 10 other states; all of them remain tied up in courts. Senator Sandy Senn succinctly expressed this concern recently, writing that “[South Carolina] should sit back and let those other states handle the expensive legal challenge to see whether federal law will change regarding abortions.”

It would be valuable to members of the legislature if the Office of the Attorney General can supplement its legal analysis with a projection of the legal fees and costs likely to be incurred by the taxpayers of our great state in defense of such a law in South Carolina, as well as an estimation of the time necessary for such a case to proceed through the federal docket.

These are important aspects to consider as we move forward with the state budgeting process because we need to have an approximation of how much funding must be taken from other areas to adequately prepare for the costs of extended litigation. 

All members of the General Assembly swore an oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States. Until the U.S. Constitution changes, we are bound by it as it exists today.

I thank you in advance for your office’s diligence in ensuring that we are equipped with the legal tools necessary to make an informed decision on H. 3020 and most importantly, uphold our oath of office. The Office of the Attorney General may forward its opinion to my Columbia Office in room 335C of the Blatt Building. 

Sincerely,
Justin T. Bamberg

, , ,

Oh, yeah…we forgot about this one from House Budget Week 2017

With the buzz associated with our recent post, Bamberg Set to “Explore” for 2018 Gubernatorial Run?, it reminded us of a post that we meant to publish during the 2017 House Floor Budget debate. We haven’t endorsed any candidate yet, but Bamberg has been an extremely active legislator during his short time in the House. He has proven himself to be a lawmaker always thinking about the future for his District and all rural communities across South Carolina.

From Budget Week 2017…

During this year’s budget debate Representative Justin Bamberg offered up an amendment  to create “a study committee to examine the feasibility of legalizing gambling, the possible revenue generated by legalizing gambling, specifically casinos, and to determine possible appropriations of revenue generated by gambling including, but not limited to, road improvement projects.” Sounded like a good idea to at least begin to study an issue that could bring billions in new revenue for state and local economies, while at the same time creating thousands of new, good paying jobs for South Carolinians.

In other southern states like Mississippi gaming accounts for billions of dollars worth of new economic activity and over $900 million in federal, state, and local tax revenue on an annual basis.

While some cite a moral opposition to gaming, it’s hard to disregard the fact that South Carolina voted solidly for a casino profiteer in President Donald Trump during the SC GOP Presidential Primary. It stands to reason that the same Republican lawmakers in the House who supported Trump would at least consider studying the impact of how allowing gaming in the state could potentially impact the state…both good and bad.

So how did the body vote on this study committee to bring in new revenue without raising taxes and/ or fees? It was defeated/killed by a vote of 68 to 40. A freaking study committee!!! We really can’t study the issue but yet our so-called “limited government” Republicans continue to support a government-ran gaming system, the SC Lottery.

It was encouraging to see that the forty who voted to at least STUDY the issue were a bipartisan coalition of members. I guess we should be somewhat thankful there are a growing number of lawmakers in the SC House of Representatives who believe it is time we at least study the feasibility of expanding gaming in SC and what this expansion could mean for the state, communities, and people of our state. These 40 lawmakers truly believe it is important to study ways we can grow state revenue without taxing or “feeing” us to death.

Check out the vote and tell us how your Representative voted…in fact you should ask them how they voted.

As we have stated before, the only way we will bring the much needed change to this state is by bringing new revenue, new jobs, and new hope to our state. So we applaud Rep. Justin Bamberg, “The People’s Rep,” for at least trying to convince his colleagues to study this potentially life-changing issue. We believe the vote count ultimately shows that tides may be changing in the chamber on the issue.

, ,

Bamberg Set to “Explore” for 2018 Gubernatorial Run?

PI is working to confirm reports of chatter circulating around Columbia that State Representative Justin Bamberg may be creating an exploratory committee this August to gauge his options for a potential gubernatorial run in 2018. According to our sources, Bamberg has become increasingly frustrated with the lack of progress and action by current Columbia leaders, and is seriously considering a run to bring “new ideas” and a “fresh perspective” to South Carolina’s challenges. We have also received tips that Bamberg is scheduled to meet with one of SC’s most prominent Democratic operatives in the coming days about his prospective run.

The lawyer and second term state Representative for Bamberg, Barnwell, and Colleton counties, has continued to garner national notoriety since his decision to switch his presidential endorsement from Hillary Clinton to Bernie Sanders in 2015. He has also earned national acclaim as one of the best and brightest civil rights attorneys in the nation after being hired to represent families in a string of very high profile cases including; the Walter Scott case, the Alton Sterling case in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, and the Keith Scott case in Charlotte, North Carolina.

Bamberg, who is just 30 years old, has amassed a great deal of success and respect during his short time in the SC House of Representatives, and most recently for his work in helping to bring an emergency facility to Barnwell and Bamberg counties.  His actions could finally spark the beginning of the 2018 Gubernatorial Campaign for SC Democrats.

We will continue to monitor this story…