McMaster lawsuit against state wasn't a fluke

Three years ago, Attorney General Henry McMaster sent shock waves through our state's legal and political communities when he intervened in a lawsuit largely on behalf of the person suing the state. As he explained at the time, his job is not to defend the General Assembly but rather to defend the state's constitution (that's why he gets to refer to himself as ''the State'' in legal documents). He is as obliged to oppose the Legislature when it violates the constitution as he is to oppose an individual

who violates our laws.

We are delighted to see that this wasn't a fluke.

Earlier this month, Mr. McMaster once again sided with constitutional gadfly Ed Sloan (or, more accurately, with the constitution), who is challenging the Legislature's way of doing business.

In his latest suit, Mr. Sloan argues that five laws passed this year violate the constitutional prohibition on laws that apply to a single county and that four others violate the single-subject rule, which prohibits stringing unrelated measures together in a single bill. ...

To try to defend these single-county laws is, at best, intellectually dishonest, and we hope the Legislature will reconsider its position. It's not that we worry that the Supreme Court will accept its fantasyland position.

But we'd like to think our Legislature is capable of admitting when it's wrong, rather than forcing the court to force it to obey the constitution that every legislator swore an oath to ''preserve, protect, and defend.''

The (Columbia) State