An Independent Public RecordFriday, July 31, 2026

MACEOPEDIA

The Public Record

← Back to Dispatches

Part of: Mace Federal Removal (Berg v. Bryant → D.S.C.) · Berg v. Bryant (and Bryant's Third-Party Complaint against Mace) · Assignment Desk Works, LLC v. Alexis Berg · Musgrave v. Mace (2:25-cv-01823-RMG) · Nancy Mace's Gag Order Violations · Litigation Overview & Court-Filing Index

Dispatch

"The one I'm already in": Mace's Senate withdrawal was a statement about the case, made under a gag order that has never been lifted

Rep. Nancy Mace's July 20, 2026 announcement that she will not run for the Senate was, in both the video and the written statement, an announcement about litigation. She said she was leaving the race 'not because I'm backing down from a fight, but because the one I'm already in matters right now,' told supporters she has 'unfinished business,' and dated that business to the day she 'stood on that House floor.' That was February 10, 2025, when she named four men and told them they had 'bought yourself a one-way ticket to hell.' Three of those men are parties to Berg v. Bryant, where a gag order barring comment on the case was extended indefinitely in December 2025 and, on the documentary record, has never been vacated, dissolved, or found expired. It has also never been enforced. Mace contends it is unconstitutional.

"The one I'm already in": Mace's Senate withdrawal was a statement about the case, made under a gag order that has never been lifted

On Monday, July 20, 2026, Rep. Nancy Mace announced she would not run for the late Sen. Lindsey Graham's seat. The political story of that announcement, the endorsement that preceded it and the office she is now leaving, is told separately in "I'm not chasing another title, I'm chasing justice", which reproduces both of her statements in full.

This dispatch is about the other half of what she said. In both the video and the written statement she posted with it, the reason she gave for leaving the race was a case.

Rep. Nancy Mace's announcement post, X, July 20, 2026 at 4:22 p.m. ET, with the 64-second video attached. View the original post.

"I want to be straight with you. I'm not running for the US Senate, not because I'm backing down from a fight, but because the one I'm already in matters right now."

And in the written statement:

"I'm not running for the Senate - because I have some unfinished business. Since I stood on that House floor, I've been fighting for every woman and girl who was told to stay silent. I want justice - and that day is coming."

She does not name a case. She does not name a person. But she dates the business she calls unfinished, and she supplies the referent herself: the day she stood on the House floor.

Maceopedia short, cut from the opening of Rep. Mace's own announcement video of July 20, 2026, through "I'm chasing justice." Her words, unaltered; the captions and nameplate are the ones burned into the video her office posted. View the original post.

The captions in the frames below are not ours. They are burned into the video Mace's own office produced and posted, which means the operative lines appear on screen in her own words as she says them.

Still from Nancy Mace's July 20, 2026 announcement video at the 8 second mark, showing her speaking to camera beneath a CONGRESSWOMAN NANCY MACE nameplate, with her video's own burned-in caption reading "but because the one I'm already in matters right now" At 0:08. Her own caption: "but because the one I'm already in matters right now." This is the line that gives her reason for leaving the race, and it appears in the video only. It is not in the written statement she posted with it.

Still from the same video at the 11 second mark, with the burned-in caption reading "The laws meant to protect me" At 0:11. Her own caption: "The laws meant to protect me." The sentence continues across the next caption block, "and other women failed us."

Still from the same video at the 20 second mark, with the burned-in caption reading "I'm chasing justice" At 0:20. Her own caption: "I'm chasing justice." The full sentence is "So I'm not chasing another title, I'm chasing justice."

The day she is pointing at

That was February 10, 2025. In a roughly 53-minute floor speech, Mace named four men and said she was going "scorched earth." Her words that day, quoted verbatim in Mace's floor speech: "I'm going scorched earth" on predators:

"Let me say their names for the record in alphabetical order: Eric Bowman of Sullivan's Island, South Carolina; Patrick Bryant of Mount Pleasant in Isle of Palms, South Carolina, who also goes by Brendan Patrick Bryant; John Osborne of Charleston, South Carolina; and Brian Musgrave of Fort Mill, South Carolina."

"To Eric Bowman, Patrick Bryant, Brian Musgrave, and John Osborne: you have bought yourself a one-way ticket to hell."

Seventeen months later, she told her followers that the fight she is staying in is the one that began there, that it is unfinished, and that "that day is coming."

Three of the four men she named that day, Eric Bowman, Patrick Bryant and John Osborne, are parties to Berg v. Bryant, No. 2025-CP-10-03124, in the Charleston County Court of Common Pleas. The allegations Mace made on the floor are contested and unproven. The men she named have denied them. No criminal charges have been brought against them arising from that speech.

The order that was in place

On November 26, 2025, Judge Donald B. Hocker entered a gag order in Berg v. Bryant on the court's own initiative. It binds every party to that case, along with third-party defendants Nancy Ruth Mace and Melissa Britton, and their agents, representatives and attorneys. By its terms, those bound are "enjoined and restrained from":

(a) "Making or publishing any comment about any aspect of this case (other than Attorney/Client) via oral, written, social media, text or any other forms of communication;"

(b) "Making or publishing any comment about any party or attorney to this case or anyone connected to this case to any person, entity or otherwise (other than Attorney/Client) via oral, written, social media, text or any other forms of communication;"

(c) "Publishing, transmitting, posting or sharing any documents, videos, photographs or any other materials related to any aspect of this case…"

The full order is reproduced, with its page images and the hosted PDF, at The Gag Order.

Whether it still applies, on the record

The order originally ran "three (3) weeks from date of this Order but can be extended by Order of this Court." What happened next is why it did not simply lapse in December:

  • December 18, 2025. The state court extended the order indefinitely, not to a fixed date, but "until there is a ruling on Bryant's Motion for TRO/Injunction." That description comes from Mace's own filing, her amended memorandum in opposition, which recites the extension and attaches it as an exhibit. No ruling on that underlying motion appears in the record.
  • January 9, 2026, signed, entered January 13. A Supplemental Gag Order added narrow carve-outs for communications with law enforcement, with legislative bodies about active criminal investigations, and for disclosures required by lawful process. It states: "The original Order and this Supplemental Order shall remain in full force and effect unless changed by a future Court Order." That is the last substantive ruling on the order's status.
  • Since then, nothing has changed it. No state or federal order vacating, dissolving, modifying or terminating the gag order appears anywhere in the record through today. Mace's December 29, 2025 motion to vacate it on First Amendment and Speech or Debate grounds never received a clean grant or denial; the Supplemental Order, which kept it in force while adding carve-outs, was the court's only answer before the case moved.

So the order has never been lifted. It has also never been enforced, and the distinction matters:

  • The January 12, 2026 contempt motion by Bryant and Bowman, which asks the court to punish five earlier statements as violations, has never been ruled on. No contempt finding has ever been entered against Mace.
  • Mace removed that contempt proceeding to federal court on January 21, 2026, where it was docketed as 2:26-cv-00306-BHH-MHC. It has sat dormant since February 19, 2026. No party moved to remand it.
  • Her separate attempt to remove the entire case, docketed as 2:26-cv-00305-BHH-MHC, drew a June 17, 2026 Report and Recommendation from Magistrate Judge Molly H. Cherry advising that the case be sent back to state court as untimely removed. Mace, representing herself, filed objections on June 30 and requested oral argument on July 1. District Judge Bruce Howe Hendricks has not ruled. As of July 21, 2026 the docket shows no activity since July 1.

The accurate description, then, is narrow and worth stating plainly: the gag order was extended indefinitely, has never been vacated by any court, and has never been enforced against anyone. Its validity is one of the questions still unresolved in a removal fight that is itself unresolved. Mace has argued throughout that the order is void.

Her position

Mace has contested the order rather than conceded it. Writing to Judge Hocker on January 21, 2026, she called it "overly broad, unconstitutional, and unenforceable, particularly as applied to a sitting member of the U.S. Congress and leading candidate for Governor of South Carolina," called the proceeding a "Kangaroo Court," and wrote: "I will not be SILENCED." That letter is reproduced in "Kangaroo Court … I will not be SILENCED".

Her July 20 statements are consistent with that position. She has never accepted that the order bars her from speaking, and she did not treat it as barring her on Monday.

What is and is not being said here

Maceopedia is not asserting that Mace violated the gag order. Whether any particular statement violates it is a contested legal question that no court has answered, the contempt motion that raises it remains undecided, and the order's own constitutionality is disputed and unruled upon. Nothing here is a finding of fact.

What is set out above is the record: the order's text, its status on the docket, her statements, and the speech she herself points back to. Readers can weigh those together.

The underlying dispute is the subject of ongoing civil litigation in Berg v. Bryant (No. 2025-CP-10-03124) and related actions, and of a separate South Carolina State Law Enforcement Division investigation. All allegations remain unproven and contested. Mace denies the claims against her; the men she named deny hers; no underlying matter has been adjudicated.

Sources & related coverage

"The one I'm already in": Mace's Senate withdrawal was a statement about the case, made under a gag order that has never been lifted: image 1
"The one I'm already in": Mace's Senate withdrawal was a statement about the case, made under a gag order that has never been lifted: image 2