South Carolina Gov. McMaster can make arguments in a voter privacy lawsuit

Gov. Henry McMaster’s office will be allowed to make arguments in a case over whether the state can send voter rolls with identifiable data to the Trump administration’s Department of Justice, Fifth Judicial Circuit Judge Daniel Coble ruled Thursday.

After the Justice Department requested the personal information, including partial Social Security numbers and driver’s license numbers, of South Carolina’s 3.3 million registered voters, one Calhoun County resident requested a restraining order.

A hearing is scheduled for 2 p.m. Friday in Richland County. It will concern about Crook’s request to block the election commission from sending the personal information to the Justice Department.

McMaster, who has said he supports sending the voter rolls including the sensitive information, moved to intervene in the case in early September.

Attorneys Brad Hutto, a Democratic state senator from Orangeburg, and Skyler Hutto are representing Anne Crook, a Calhoun County registered voter and former president of the Orangeburg-Calhoun Technical College. In an affidavit filed Monday, she expressed concern for the safety of her personal data if it were to be shared with the Justice Department.

At a Wednesday hearing to determine whether McMaster could interview, Sen. Hutto argued that McMaster’s involvement in the case could undermine the independence of the election commission. While the governor appoints commission members, the Election Commission is supposed to operate independently, Hutto argued.

“I think part of this is an attempt to politicize this process, but part of it is attempt to invade the independence of the election commission,” Hutto said.

Attorney William Grayson Lambert, legal counsel in the governor’s office, argued that McMaster was responsible for upholding state laws and its constitution, making it appropriate for him to intervene. He said that McMaster’s arguments would be unique from the state Election Commission.

He also told Coble that McMaster would not hold up the case’s hearings or proceedings.

“This is not about politicizing anything,” Lambert said. “This is not about big-footing the election commission. This is about defending state law and helping ensure that state law is properly interpreted.”

The voter rolls have not been sent to the Department of Justice, a spokesperson for the election commission confirmed late Wednesday afternoon. The voter rolls will not be sent to the Trump administration until both parties signed a data-sharing agreement, election commission spokesperson John Michael Catalano said. The Justice Department’s draft of the agreement will be sent to the election commission “soon,” Catalano wrote in an email.

The crux of Crook’s concerns are over whether sending the data violates her South Carolina constitutional right to privacy.

The Trump administration wants to enforce the National Voter Registration Act and the Help America Vote Act using the data, according to emails from the Justice Department to the election commission. The emails did not disclose how the Justice Department would use the data. A spokesperson for the Justice Department said the voter rolls would be “screened for ineligible data” in an email to The State last week.

Voter information is public. Any South Carolina voter is allowed to purchase voter rolls, but sensitive data like Social Security numbers are not publicly available. Hutto told reporters Sept. 10 that voters don’t want their data shared broadly because it could open them up to identity theft. He also mentioned “Big Brother” anxieties if the Justice Department obtained the data and shared it with other agencies or used it for undisclosed reasons.

“South Carolina voters want to know that when they went to register to vote, they gave that information with a real and one purpose of being able to vote,” Hutto said. “They didn’t sign a waiver that says you can share my information with anybody you want to, or I’ve authorized you to share this with the federal government.”

Before his firing, former Elections Commission Executive Director Howard Knapp was also involved in the debate over whether to send personal voter information to the Department of Justice.

Knapp was fired by the commission last week after a nearly five-hour closed-door meeting. The commission did not offer any reasons for their 3-2 split vote apart from a desire for a change in leadership, and chairman Dennis Shedd declined to answer questions after the firing.

On Tuesday, former deputy director Paige Salonich was also fired by the agency for allegedly placing an unauthorized recording device in the state election commission’s downtown office on the day Knapp was ousted. The State Law Enforcement Division removed the recording device from the office the following day. SLED also confirmed last week that it is investigating Knapp for allegations of misconduct.