In a surprise move, Attorney General Henry McMaster said Wednesday that the $220 million Life Sciences Act is an example of legislative bobtailing and is unconstitutional.

McMaster said he plans to side with Ed Sloan, the Greenville gadfly who is suing the state and the leaders of the General Assembly in a lawsuit pending before the S.C. Supreme Court.

It’s an unusual move for the state’s top attorney to side with someone who is suing the state.

But McMaster said his primary responsibility is to uphold the constitution, not to defend the state at all costs.

“It’s very clear to this office that this act is unconstitutional and should be declared so by the Supreme Court,” McMaster said.

In March, the Legislature passed the Life Sciences Act, a package of measures meant to spur economic development around the state’s universities. Legislators consider it one of the biggest achievements of the six-month session that ended June 3.

But Sloan, Gov. Mark Sanford and now McMaster say the legislation is too sweeping, with too many bulbs and balls on one weighted-down Christmas tree.

The state constitution requires that legislation be about one subject. But the Life Sciences Act includes provisions that among other things, give universities the ability to partner with private businesses, change qualifications for LIFE scholarships, and allow USC Sumter to offer four-year degrees.

McMaster, a Republican and the former head of the state party, said he knows his decision will not be popular with the Republican leaders of the House and Senate.

“This is not politics,” McMaster said. “This is the constitution. As far as this office is concerned, the identity of the parties is irrelevant.”

McMaster said he is only dealing with this instance of bobtailing, not the practice at large. He said he is weighing in now for one reason: “We got sued.”

His decision is a victory for Sanford, who vetoed the legislation in March and was quickly overridden.

At the time, Sanford called a press conference and threatened to sue the Republican-led Legislature himself, prompting an intra-party fight that temporarily sidetracked the session. Sanford’s threat led to a closed-door session with Republican House members who said that Sanford had blind-sided them.

Sanford spokesman Chris Drummond said Wednesday that Sanford had “clearly laid out his concerns.” Drummond said he could not comment further before McMaster filed his brief with the court, expected in August.

McMaster’s decision was a blow to legislators, who grumbled privately that they regularly tie issues together, as is their prerogative under their rules. The House and Senate each have discretion over what members deem germane, or relevant.

They said McMaster was trying to side with Sanford, a politician whose approval ratings are 70-plus percent, in large part because of his fights with them.

House Speaker David Wilkins, R-Greenville, said he could not comment because like McMaster, he is a defendant in Sloan’s pending lawsuit.

Sen. Luke Rankin, R-Horry, said McMaster’s opinion was exactly that — one opinion among many.

The only opinion that ultimately matters, Rankin said, is that of the court. That decision will not come before late fall.

In the meantime, Rankin said, the uncertainty complicates the implementation of the Life Sciences Act — for now, the law.

In Myrtle Beach, civic leaders are putting together plans for a trade center that would make the coast a year-round destination. The Life Sciences Act is to pay for up to $7 million of the cost.

“We can’t go this alone,” Rankin said. “It’s a major investment that we liken to the state going to the table with a BMW or any other major new industry, where we put our money where our mouth is.

“It’s vitally important that the state partner with us.”

The universities share Rankin’s concern.

USC spokesman Russ McKinney said administrators are laying the groundwork for a research campus downtown. That work includes deals that could, for example, have a private business build on university land and hire school researchers.

“We would certainly hope that this matter,” McKinney said, “whatever its intentions are, does not derail or impose any onerous delays for any of the research campuses in the state, the university in particular.”

The lawsuit is unusual in that it is in the “original jurisdiction” of the Supreme Court. That means that no other judge or court has heard the case. Nor will any.

Sloan and the defendants — McMaster, Wilkins and Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer, the presiding officer of the Senate — are negotiating which documents will constitute the historical record in the case. That record must be established by July 14.

Then the parties have until mid-August to submit their legal arguments on constitutionality. If the court decides to hear oral arguments in the case, they are likely to be scheduled in the late fall or early winter.

James Carpenter, the attorney representing Sloan, said Wednesday that McMaster’s decision “has got to help.”

“It’s good news,” Carpenter said. “It’s gratifying to know that the attorney general is viewing this as we are.”

Carpenter said his client, Sloan, is a retired highway contractor who has 30 ongoing lawsuits, most in defense of the taxpayer. Many deal with procurement issues, such as the Department of Transportation’s awarding a contract for the Ravenel Bridge without a competitive process.

“Mr. Sloan thinks it’s important that the constitution be upheld,” Carpenter said. “This is, in this instance, a flagrant disregard of the constitution.”

Reach Bauerlein at (803) 771-8485 or vbauerlein@thestate.com