Edward Sloan Jr. has a point this time.

The man who sued Gov. Mark Sanford, claiming he shouldn't serve as governor and as a member of the Air Force Reserves, has filed another suit against state government officials.

Sloan is making good on the threat Sanford chose to put aside. He is suing the Speaker of the House, David Wilkins, and the president of the Senate, Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer, over the structure of the Life Sciences Act.

Sloan has now taken up the cause and has asked the state Supreme Court to decide the issue. The court should do so, and it should decide in favor of Sloan and of the entire state.

Sloan's cause this time is not an obscure point of law, it is the best interests of the state. When lawmakers allowed local pet projects to be added to the Life Sciences Act, they acted in their own best interests, not those of the state.

For instance, they allowed Sumter lawmakers to insert a provision making the University of South Carolina Sumter a four-year school.

They did so despite the fact that such a change doesn't fit with any statewide higher education plan. They did so over the objections of the Higher Education Commission and the USC Board of Trustees.

They sided with lawmakers' privilege and against the priorities and needs of the state as a whole.

Sanford and Sloan, in separate ways, are working to reform the legislative process, to push lawmakers to put statewide priorities above their own parochial plans.

They need help from the Supreme Court. The court should take Sloan's case and give the entire state relief from legislative arrogance.