The decision means the town's hopes for survival now hinge on whether the S.C. Supreme Court reverses Judge Thomas Hughston's ruling. The town's planned appeal will allow it to stay alive until then, lawyers on both sides said.
The decision delighted Charleston officials, who argue that it makes no sense to allow a new town to incorporate next to an established municipality. The town would prevent the city, which already includes about 40 percent of the island within its boundaries, from growing as it naturally would, they say.
"This is great news for the citizens of the city of Charleston," Mayor Joseph P. Riley Jr. said Friday. "This was very much about the long term ... health and viability of this old and historic city."
Town officials, stung by the ruling, said the battle is far from over. "We have not yet begun to fight," said James Island Mayor Mary Clark.
She compared the city's attack on the town's legality to the efforts of pirates who raided James Island hundreds of years ago, and added that she regretted that a cannon that residents used to fend off the pirates no longer exists.
"The pirates in this century are worse than the ones before," she said. "Those only looted your homes. These steal everything from you: your rights, your right to exist."
So far, the history of the second town of James Island closely parallels that of the first.
That town, created a decade ago, died when Charleston successfully challenged its right to exist, winning at both the circuit and Supreme Court levels.
This time, town officials pointed optimistically to a new state law that addressed the first town's flaw, which was that it crossed marshes and waterways already in the city. The law allowed new municipalities to share such areas in order to connect separate pieces of high land.
The city argued, however, that the law was unconstitutional special legislation, saying it was crafted just for the town and did not generally apply throughout the state.
During a brief trial in December, the town's geography expert testified that the law could be used in three other places in South Carolina.
In calling the law unconstitutional, however, the judge ruled that only James Island needed to use the law to connect separate "doughnut holes." The three hypothetical municipalities cited by the town could have formed without the law, although they would need to use it to grab certain doughnut holes.
The ruling also noted that even if the three examples were similar, the Supreme Court has struck down legislation that applies to "statistically insignificant" numbers of places.
Finally, the judge ruled that allowing waterways and marshes to be shared but not other features, such as highways or parks, was arbitrary.
The only bright spot for the town was that the judge disagreed with the city's claim that, even if the law were constitutional, the pieces used were too far apart to form a town legally.
The legal battle now moves to the Supreme Court again, lawyers on both sides agreed.
The decision there will have consequences beyond the island's borders. Should the town survive, it will be entitled to a portion of locally shared revenues that would come from a pot currently shared by the county government and municipalities. It's been estimated that the new town could cost the county and larger cities hundreds of thousands of dollars a year.
Both sides expressed confidence in their chances before the Supreme Court, and both agreed that the stakes could not be higher.
For the city, the existence of what Riley called "the now-illegal town of James Island" would halt its growth on the island, something he said is critical for Charleston.
For the town, its existence is at stake.
Trent Kernodle, the lawyer representing the town, predicted victory. Even if the Supreme Court rules against the town, the fight will not be over, he said, noting that the Legislature could pass a new law designed to pass constitutional muster.
"We will win this war," he said. "The question is only if we win at this particular stage. No matter what happens, we will eventually win."
The judge has not yet ruled on a second city suit, which argues that once the town was formed, portions of the district overlapped by the town ceased to be a part of the James Island Public Service District.
If the town ultimately is ruled illegal, that suit will be a moot point, but city attorneys said they still expect the judge to issue a ruling on the case.
Copyright © 2003, The Post and Courier, All Rights Reserved