The General Assembly was slapped down by the state Supreme Court Friday for loading up a controversial bill with what critics said were wasteful projects.

The court declared parts of the massive Life Science Act, passed last year, unconstitutional, because they did not relate closely enough to the act’s main subject, as required by state law.

The ruling means:

• USC Sumter won’t be able to offer four-year degrees.

• A Lowcountry tech school won’t be able to add a cooking program.

• Myrtle Beach won’t get a new convention and trade center.

The court upheld many sections of the act that directly related to the state’s efforts to attract high-tech companies. However, it said other parts — including the Sumter, Charleston and Myrtle Beach projects — should be stricken from law.

Writing for the court’s majority, John Waller said those projects were “clearly too tangential” to the act’s main goal.

Justice Costa Pleicones wrote a partial dissent, arguing the court should have considered striking the entire Life Science Act. He is the only member of the court who is not a former legislator.

The ruling was a victory for those who have fought against last minute tack-ons to bills, a practice known as “bobtailing.”

Attorney General Henry McMaster, a chief proponent of the lawsuit challenging the act, called the decision “courageous” and said it sends a strong message to lawmakers.

McMaster had sided with a Greenville man, Edward Sloan, who sued the General Assembly.

Sloan wanted the court to void the whole act, his lawyer said Friday. “What the court did, by picking specific things out, was become a ‘super-legislature,’” said attorney James Carpenter.

Lawmakers’ reactions to the ruling were mixed.

House Speaker David Wilkins, R-Greenville, hailed the decision as a “great day for economic development” because the justices did not strike the pro-business sections of the law.

But Sen. Phil Leventis, D-Sumter, called the ruling “a little schizophrenic.”

“They muddied the water a lot more than they cleared it up,” said Leventis, who had fought to get four-year programs for USC Sumter included in the Life Sciences Act. “I don’t know how they decided what relates to economic development and what doesn’t.”

The USC Sumter provision drew fire from Gov. Mark Sanford, who vetoed the bill in March and threatened to sue the General Assembly after it overrode the veto.

Sanford spokesman Will Folks called the court’s ruling a big win. “We don’t think adding a bunch of pork-barrel items to a bill is good business,” he said.

The Life Science bill initially provided incentives for new companies, set up a state-run venture capital fund and allowed the state’s research universities to build new laboratories.

Hunter Howard, president of the S.C. Chamber of Commerce, said those are important steps for the state.

“It’s so critical to the state’s future,” he said. “To be competitive with other states, we have to entice the companies to come here and give the universities flexibility in the rules.”

The bill ran into problems in the Senate, where some lawmakers began calling it “the Christmas tree.” Some items, like the multimillion-dollar center in Myrtle Beach, were inserted into the bill without the knowledge of some legislators.

Senate Finance chairman Hugh Leatherman, R-Florence, said recent changes in Senate rules probably help ensure bobtailing is a thing of the past. Those changes more narrowly define what can be included in a bill.

However, Richard Seamon, a former USC constitutional law professor who teaches at the University of Idaho, said that may not be enough.

“The General Assembly is going to have to be a lot more careful. (The ruling) doesn’t lay down any general principles so they can avoid this in the future. It’s pretty likely you could be seeing more litigation in the future.”

Jim DuPlessis contributed to this article. Reach Stensland at (803) 771-8358 or jstensland@thestate.com.