South Carolina Criminal Defense Blog

Earlier this week, the South Carolina Supreme Court released its decision on Myrtle Beach's motorcycle ordinances - the laws are invalid because they are pre-empted by state law.

n S.C. Code Ann. § 56-5-30 (2009) the General Assembly authorized local authorities to act in the field of traffic regulation if the ordinance does not conflict with the provisions of the Uniform Traffic Act. Even assuming, as the City contends, that the Helmet Ordinance does not conflict with the Uniform Traffic Act, we find that the ordinance may not stand as the need for uniformity is plainly evident in the regulation of motorcycle helmets and eyewear. Were local authorities allowed to enforce individual helmet ordinances, riders would need to familiarize themselves with the various ordinances in advance of a trip, so as to ensure compliance. Riders opting not to wear helmets or eyewear in other areas of the state would be obliged to carry the equipment with them if they intended to pass through a city with a helmet ordinance. Moreover, local authorities might enact ordinances imposing additional and even conflicting equipment requirements. Such burdens would unduly limit a citizen's freedom of movement throughout the State. Consequently, the Helmet Ordinance must fail under the doctrine of implied preemption.

Myrtle Beach City Council's attempt to harass bikers and kick them out of town = fail. How about we refund the money for all of the tickets that have been paid, now? And reimburse motorcyclists for the time that they spent on the side of the road getting hassled by the police during bike week? Because you knew, from the beginning, that these ordinances were unconstitutional?