Nancy Mace's Gag Order Violations
A November 26, 2025 gag order bars Nancy Mace and the other parties in Berg v. Bryant from commenting on any aspect of the case, any party, or any attorney through any form of communication. This is that order. And a running record of the public statements she made after it, including the five that a January 2026 contempt motion asks the court to punish as repeated violations.
Gag Order Violations
Under four hours after the gag order reached her lawyer, Mace posts about a co-defendant's bond: 'Not nearly enough.'
On November 26, 2025, the same day Judge Donald B. Hocker entered a sua sponte gag order in Berg v. Bryant and circulated it to all counsel at 2:23 p.m. Rep. Nancy Mace replied at 6:43 p.m. from her verified @RepNancyMace account to a post reporting that co-defendant Eric Bowman had been granted bond on domestic-violence and harassment charges, writing: 'Not nearly enough. Very concerned for the safety of his victims. Keeping them in my prayers tonight.' A contempt motion filed January 12, 2026 attaches the post as Exhibit 3 and contends it violated the order within hours of its issuance; Mace disputes both the motion and the validity of the order, calling it unconstitutional and unenforceable.
Two days into the gag order, Mace posts: 'IMPEACH ALL CORRUPT JUDGES', 'especially including those in South Carolina SPECIFICALLY.'
On November 28, 2025, two days after Judge Hocker entered the sua sponte gag order in Berg v. Bryant, Mace posted from her verified @RepNancyMace account calling to impeach 'all corrupt judges,' adding in the same thread 'especially including those in South Carolina SPECIFICALLY.' Bryant and Bowman's January 12, 2026 contempt motion makes the post Exhibit 4 and contends it violated the gag order.
While under the gag order, Mace's congressional office sends a mass newsletter about the case: 'I WILL NOT be silenced.'
On December 1, 2025, while the Berg v. Bryant gag order was in effect, a mass email newsletter from Rep. Nancy Mace's congressional office, headlined 'Rep. Nancy Mace says 2 more women accuse her ex-fiancé of abuse,' named Patrick Bryant, recited unproven allegations, and declared 'I WILL NOT be silenced.' Bryant and Bowman's January 12, 2026 contempt motion attaches the newsletter as Exhibit 8, contending it violated the gag order.
Bowman's lawyer reports a December 27 Instagram video to the judge as a gag-order violation
On December 27, 2025, while the Berg v. Bryant gag order was in effect, Mace posted a video on Instagram from @repnancymace; counsel for co-defendant Eric Bowman, Robert Merting, emailed Judge Hocker on December 29 to report it, and Bryant and Bowman's January 12, 2026 contempt motion attaches it as Exhibits 5-7, contending it referred to Bowman by name in terms implying criminal conduct 'that has not been alleged in this litigation.'
A pinned post viewed 20,000+ times: Mace calls South Carolina a 'pedophile paradise' while the gag order is in effect
On December 31, 2025, from her verified @RepNancyMace account, Mace published and pinned a post attacking the South Carolina Attorney General, calling the state a 'pedophile paradise' at a time when a gag order in Berg v. Bryant was in effect. The post reportedly re-shared content from her December 27, 2025 video. A contempt motion filed January 12, 2026 attaches it as Exhibit 9 and notes the post had been viewed more than 20,000 times. Mace disputes the validity of the gag order and its application to her.
While the gag order holds, Mace proposes Aggravated Voyeurism Act and ties it to her 'personal experiences' as a victim
On January 3, 2026, with the Berg v. Bryant gag order in effect, Rep. Nancy Mace announced the Aggravated Voyeurism Act at the South Carolina statehouse and publicly tied it to her 'personal experiences' as a self-described victim of voyeurism. The announcement was not cited in the contempt motion filed January 12, 2026; it is presented here as a public statement made during the order's effective period. Mace disputes the validity and scope of the gag order.
While the gag order holds, Mace promotes her 'Predators Act' as 'deeply personal'
On January 11, 2026, with the Berg v. Bryant gag order in effect and days before the court's supplemental order, Mace promoted her 'Preventing Prosecutors from Protecting Predators Act' from her verified @RepNancyMace account, calling it 'deeply personal' and tying it to 'trauma' she says she experienced 'two years ago.' Opposing counsel flagged the post as a continued public statement about matters connected to the case.
In a letter to the judge overseeing her gag order, Mace calls the court a 'Kangaroo Court' and moves the contempt matter to federal court: 'I will not be SILENCED.'
On January 21, 2026, Rep. Nancy Mace wrote directly to Judge Donald B. Hocker, the Charleston County circuit judge presiding over Berg v. Bryant, the case in which she is a third-party defendant under a gag order, calling the court a 'Kangaroo Court,' declaring the gag order unconstitutional, and announcing she was removing the contempt proceeding against her to federal court. Mace wrote the letter pro se, after she says she had discharged her counsel; it was stamped FILED on the state docket January 22, 2026. The full five-page filing is reproduced below. The allegations underlying the litigation are disputed and contested; Mace denies Bryant's claims, and Bryant denies Mace's.
Under a gag order barring 'any comment about any aspect of this case,' Mace uses her televised concession speech to talk about 'predators that got away in my case'
On the night of June 9, 2026, after conceding the South Carolina Republican gubernatorial primary, Nancy Mace told her Charleston election-night crowd, and a live television audience, that she had talked to Attorney General Alan Wilson 'about my case' and would help his administration ensure that 'predators that got away in my case … we finally put criminals behind bars.' Mace is a third-party defendant in Berg v. Bryant, where a November 26, 2025 gag order bars every party from 'making or publishing any comment about any aspect of this case' or about any party or person connected to it, and a January 12, 2026 civil-contempt motion over her earlier public statements remains pending. Both orders are reproduced in full below. Mace contends the gag order is unconstitutional; all underlying allegations are unproven and contested, and no court has ruled on the June 9 remarks.
"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.
Page 1 of the Gag Order, signed by Judge Donald B. Hocker sua sponte on November 26, 2025, in Berg v. Bryant, No. 2025-CP-10-03124 (Charleston County Court of Common Pleas).
Nine days before this order was signed, Judge Hocker had entered a separate order in the same case ending the use of pseudonyms. See No More Jane Does: the de-anonymization order (November 17, 2025) and the Berg v. Bryant case hub.
The Order
Judge Donald B. Hocker signed the Gag Order on November 26, 2025, and it was entered on the public docket at 10:43 a.m. on December 9, 2025, in Berg v. Bryant, Case No. 2025-CP-10-03124, in the Charleston County Court of Common Pleas, Ninth Judicial Circuit. The judge issued it sua sponte (on the court's own initiative), "not in response to a recently filed Motion for Temporary Restraining Order." It binds every party to the case: Alexis Berg; Patrick Bryant; John Osborne; Eric Bowman; Pommer Group, LLC; Assignment Desk Works, LLC; GLT2, LLC; and third-party defendants Nancy Ruth Mace and Melissa Britton, together with 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 and/or party and/or attorney and/or any person connected to this case…"
The order set its own duration at "three (3) weeks from date of this Order but can be extended by Order of this Court," and the court invited briefing "on the issue of a Gag Order vs. First Amendment rights." The full four-page order is reproduced below and the original PDF is available here.
Page 2, the order enjoins "any comment about any aspect of this case … via oral, written, social media, text or any other forms of communication."
Page 3, the bar on commenting about "any party or attorney … or anyone connected to this case," and on "publishing, transmitting, posting or sharing any documents, videos, photographs or any other materials related to any aspect of this case."
Page 4, "SO ORDERED. DONALD B. HOCKER. Date: 11-26-25. Laurens, South Carolina."
The Supplemental Order
Judge Hocker signed a Supplemental Gag Order on January 9, 2026 (entered at 1:59 p.m. on January 13, 2026). It left the original order "in full force and effect" and clarified that nothing in it prohibits or restricts: communications with law enforcement and local, state, or federal agencies (including the Solicitor's and Attorney General's offices) "with respect to active criminal investigations"; communications with "legislative bodies (federal and state) with respect to active criminal investigations"; and "statements or disclosures required by Court Order, subpoena, or any other lawful process." The three-page order is available here.
Page 1 of the Supplemental Gag Order, supplementing the November 26, 2025 order.
Page 2, the carve-outs, over Judge Hocker's signature.
Is the order still in effect?
The order originally ran "three (3) weeks from date of this Order but can be extended by Order of this Court." It did not lapse at the end of those three weeks, and on the documentary record no court has ever lifted it.
- December 18, 2025. The 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 13, 2026. The Supplemental Order added narrow carve-outs and stated that "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. No state or federal order vacating, dissolving, modifying or terminating the gag order appears anywhere in the record. Mace's December 29, 2025 motion to vacate never received a clean grant or denial; the Supplemental Order, which kept the order in force while adding carve-outs, was the court's only answer before the case moved to federal court.
It has never been enforced, either. The January 12, 2026 contempt motion has never been ruled on and no contempt finding has ever been entered against Mace. She removed that contempt proceeding to federal court on January 21, 2026, where it was docketed as 2:26-cv-00306-BHH-MHC and has sat dormant since February 19, 2026. Her separate attempt to remove the entire case, 2:26-cv-00305-BHH-MHC, drew a June 17, 2026 Report and Recommendation from Magistrate Judge Molly H. Cherry advising remand as untimely; Mace, pro se, filed objections on June 30 and requested oral argument on July 1. District Judge Bruce Howe Hendricks has not ruled.
The narrow and accurate statement is this: the order was extended indefinitely, has never been vacated by any court, and has never been enforced against anyone. Its validity is one of the unresolved questions inside a removal fight that is itself unresolved. Mace has argued throughout that it is void.
Mace's response to the order
Mace has contested the gag order rather than conceded its validity. On December 29, 2025, her counsel moved to vacate it on First Amendment and Speech or Debate Clause grounds. On January 21, 2026, writing pro se, she told Judge Hocker the order was "overly broad, unconstitutional, and unenforceable," called the proceeding a "Kangaroo Court," declared "I will not be SILENCED," and removed the contempt proceeding to federal court. See "I will not be SILENCED" and the Berg v. Bryant docket. The underlying allegations are disputed and unproven; Mace denies Bryant's claims, and the other named parties deny Mace's. Nothing here is a finding of fact.
The motion to hold her in contempt
On January 12, 2026, Patrick Bryant and Eric Bowman moved for an Order to Show Cause and an order of civil contempt, asking the court to find that Mace had "willfully violated" the gag order through a series of public communications made "after entry and extension of the Gag Order." The motion recounts that Judge Hocker circulated the order to all counsel of record by email at 2:23 p.m. on November 26, 2025; Mace's counsel was copied. Thus, the movants argue, "Mace and her agents had actual notice." The motion remains pending and contested; no contempt finding has been entered.
Page 1 of Patrick Bryant's and Eric Bowman's Order to Show Cause / Motion for Civil Contempt, filed Jan. 12, 2026, in Berg v. Bryant, No. 2025-CP-10-03124. The full motion is available here.
The violations the contempt motion alleges
Each entry links to a dispatch reproducing the underlying public statement and the motion's account of it. The characterizations are the movants'; the allegations are unproven and contested, Mace denies them, and she contends the gag order is itself unconstitutional and unenforceable. Three stand out: how quickly the first post came (under four hours), the mass-distributed congressional newsletter that named a party, and the pinned post viewed more than 20,000 times.
- November 26, 2025-6:43 p.m., Less than four hours after the order reached her counsel, a reply from her verified @RepNancyMace account to a post about co-defendant Eric Bowman's bond: "Not nearly enough. Very concerned for the safety of his victims. Keeping them in my prayers tonight.", dispatch (Exhibit 3)
- November 28, 2025-11:00 a.m., From @RepNancyMace: "IMPEACH ALL CORRUPT JUDGES" and, in the same thread, "Especially including those in South Carolina SPECIFICALLY.", dispatch (Exhibit 4)
- December 1, 2025, A mass email newsletter from her congressional office, headlined "Rep. Nancy Mace says 2 more women accuse her ex-fiancé of abuse," naming a party and declaring "I WILL NOT be silenced.", dispatch (Exhibit 8)
- December 27, 2025-10:00 p.m., An Instagram video from @repnancymace that, per the motion, named co-defendant Eric Bowman in terms implying criminal conduct "that has not been alleged in this litigation"; Bowman's counsel reported it to the judge. dispatch (Exhibits 5-7)
- December 31, 2025-4:29 p.m., A pinned post viewed more than 20,000 times calling South Carolina a "pedophile paradise" and re-sharing the December 27 video. dispatch (Exhibit 9)
Other public statements while the order was in effect
These were not part of the January 12 contempt motion, but fall in the same period and tie her public advocacy to her own account of the case:
- January 3, 2026, Announcing the "Aggravated Voyeurism Act," Mace tied the bill to her experience as a self-described victim. dispatch
- January 11, 2026, Promoting her "Preventing Prosecutors from Protecting Predators Act" from @RepNancyMace as "deeply personal," with a video referencing "trauma" from "two years ago." dispatch
Her response
Mace has contested the order at every step rather than concede it. On December 29, 2025, her counsel moved to vacate it on First Amendment and Speech or Debate Clause grounds. On January 21, 2026, writing pro se, she told Judge Hocker the order was "overly broad, unconstitutional, and unenforceable," called the proceeding a "Kangaroo Court," declared "I will not be SILENCED," and removed the contempt proceeding to federal court, "I will not be SILENCED".
Afterward
- June 9, 2026, In her primary-night concession speech, Mace spoke of "predators that got away in MY CASE" and of a system "where they can leak evidence in a criminal case two days before an election", dispatch.
- July 20, 2026, Announcing she would not run for the Senate, Mace gave litigation as her reason, in a video: "not because I'm backing down from a fight, but because the one I'm already in matters right now", and in writing: "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." The House floor speech she dates that business to is her February 10, 2025 speech, in which she named four men, three of them parties to this case, and told them "you have bought yourself a one-way ticket to hell." dispatch
The tip line that is still up
Separate from any single post the contempt motion counts, one of Mace's public artifacts about the men she named is still live on her official congressional website. On May 29, 2025, months before the gag order, her House office published a press release, "Congresswoman Nancy Mace Responds To Rape Victim's Class Action Lawsuit Against Predators From Mace's Floor Speech," that names the parties to this case - "Eric Bowman, Patrick Bryant, and John Osborne" - and points the public to a tip line about them:
"A tipline also remains active with the Congresswoman's office at 843.212.7048 for those who believe they may have been recorded, sexually assaulted, or otherwise victimized or abused by these predators."
The page is dated before the November 26, 2025 order and is not one of the communications the January 12 contempt motion asks the court to punish. What is notable is that it never came down. The press release, the named parties, and the open solicitation about "these predators" remained continuously published on mace.house.gov throughout the gag-order period and were still live when this entry was updated on June 16, 2026. By its terms, the order bars those bound from "publishing, transmitting, posting or sharing any documents, videos, photographs or any other materials related to any aspect of this case" and from "making or publishing any comment about any party or attorney to this case or anyone connected to this case." The allegations remain disputed and unproven; Mace denies Bryant's claims and the named parties deny hers; nothing here is a finding of fact.
The press release as it appears on her official House site, mace.house.gov, captured June 16, 2026. Posted May 29, 2025, it names "Eric Bowman, Patrick Bryant, and John Osborne," the parties to Berg v. Bryant.
The solicitation on the same page, still live as of June 16, 2026: the office invites anyone who believes they were "victimized or abused by these predators" to call a tip line.
The release is on her official House site at mace.house.gov.
Sources & related coverage
- The order itself: Gag Order (PDF, 4 pages), signed Nov. 26, 2025, entered Dec. 9, 2025, Berg v. Bryant, No. 2025-CP-10-03124.
- Supplemental Gag Order (PDF, 3 pages), signed Jan. 9, 2026.
- Case background and docket: Berg v. Bryant · The Litigation
- The state docket is verifiable on the SC Judicial Branch Public Index under Case No. 2025-CP-10-03124.
- Mace's tip line (still live): Congresswoman Nancy Mace Responds To Rape Victim's Class Action Lawsuit Against Predators From Mace's Floor Speech, mace.house.gov, posted May 29, 2025 (confirmed live June 16, 2026).