Election Denial in South Carolina
1 Election Denier currently holds statewide office with election oversight power.
3 Election Deniers have held, or run for, statewide office since 2020.
The landscape in South Carolina
State Attorneys General are the people’s representatives. On behalf of the people, they can support free and fair elections—or erode trust in elections.
Under Attorney General Alan Wilson, an Election Denier, South Carolina joined a brief supporting Texas v. Pennsylvania, the failed lawsuit that sought to overturn the valid 2020 election results in four states. Wilson said he was acting to protect “election integrity.” He was later the subject of a disciplinary complaint. South Carolina has also prohibited donations to support election funding.
After the Jan. 6 attack, five members of the state’s Congressional delegation voted to overturn valid election results.
1 Election Denier holds statewide Office right now.
Elections are run by the states. In South Carolina, the Governor, Attorney General, and executive director of the state Election Commission are the state officials responsible for overseeing elections. In most states, the Secretary of State is the chief election official. South Carolina is an exception: The state Election Commission appoints an executive director. It’s up to all of them to make sure the will of the people is always respected.
Read more about The Roles of Our Elected Officials in Elections
Attorney General of South Carolina
Term started 2023
Term ends 2027
-
Taken action to undermine the integrity of the 2020 presidential election or subsequent election cycles, including:
Filing or supporting litigation seeking to overturn the results based on conspiracies or baseless legal theories.
Filing or supporting litigation that was sanctioned for being malicious or without merit in the aftermath of an election.
Promoting or participating in a Stop the Steal–sponsored or branded event or rally during or following the 2020 election.
Calling for a “forensic audit” of the 2020 presidential election or a race in subsequent elections after the results were certified, were officially audited, or stood up to multiple legal challenges.
-
Falsely claimed former President Trump won the 2020 presidential election instead of the legitimate winner, President Biden.
-
Spread lies or promoted conspiracies about the legitimacy of the 2020 presidential election or subsequent election cycles in public, including in social media, press statements, or comments to the press.
-
Refused to certify, or called on or pressured election officials to refuse to certify, the 2020 presidential election results or a race in subsequent elections based on meritless claims about election fraud, voter fraud, misinformation, or lies.
-
Refused to concede a race, or publicly supported a candidate’s refusal to concede a race, after the results were officially audited or stood up to multiple legal challenges.
How South Carolina compares
Every state runs its own elections, with its own laws and processes. Check out how South Carolina compares with other states in its region when it comes to Election Deniers holding state election administration jobs.
Election Denial in Southeast States
Sitting official is an Election Denier
- In Florida, the Governor appoints the Secretary of State. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis is an Election Denier and appointed Cord Byrd as Florida’s Secretary of State in May 2022.
- In North Carolina, the Executive Director is appointed by the North Carolina State Board of Elections.
- In South Carolina, the Executive Director is appointed by the South Carolina Election Commission.
- In Tennessee, the Secretary of State is appointed by the legislature.
- In Virginia, the Governor appoints the Commissioner of Elections.
Voter turnout over time
Voters are always the backstop against election denial, whether Election Deniers are already in office or vying for power. It’s important to turn out for every election in your state—and to vote in every race on your ballot. Downballot races, like contests for Attorney General and Secretary of State, have historically drawn fewer voters, even though the positions are critical to keeping elections free, fair, and secure. Here’s a look at voter participation in South Carolina elections over time. Notice that in years with several important positions up for election, some voters choose not to vote in every race.
Voter Participation in South Carolina Since 2016
- #071B40
- President
- #2455A0
- Senator
- #4387F1
- Governor
- #A7C5F3
- Attorney General
- #EDF3FD
- Secretary of State
2016 Presidential
-
President had a 58% voter turnout rate
-
Senator had a 57% voter turnout rate
-
2018 Midterm
-
Governor had a 46% voter turnout rate
-
Attorney General had a 46% voter turnout rate
-
Secretary of State had a 46% voter turnout rate
-
2020 Presidential
-
President had a 65% voter turnout rate
-
Senator had a 65% voter turnout rate
-
Voter turnout
Data on the number of votes cast in each race are from state elections depositories, supplemented with data from the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC), House Election Statistics, and The Book of States. Rates are calculated using the Census’s Citizen Voting Age Population (CVAP) estimates. Rates will be updated when the Census releases new CVAP data for 2022.
Beyond the ballot box
Each year, state legislators introduce thousands of bills related to elections. And in the past few years, we’ve identified a concerning trend. Across the country, state legislatures are considering bills that would make it easier for partisan actors to manipulate an election, and maybe even overturn the will of the people. We’re tracking these bills along with our partners in an ongoing series of reports called “A Democracy Crisis in the Making.” In 2023 alone, through early May, we tracked 185 bills introduced in 38 state legislatures that would politicize, criminalize, or interfere with elections.
The anti-democracy playbook is simple: change the rules and change the referees, in order to change the results. These bills go hand-in-hand with the Election Denier movement: They’re about taking power away from voters and making it harder for trusted election officials to do their jobs.
Legislative Interference in South Carolina by Category
As of May 3, 2023, 3 bills had been introduced or were under consideration in South Carolina. None have been enacted or adopted and none have been vetoed after passing.
These bills show that the threat to elections in South Carolina, and all across the country, goes well beyond the ballot box.
- Creating unworkable burdens in election administration.These bills would interfere with the basic procedures of election administration, increasing the risk of chaos and delay and enabling misleading claims of irregularity.
- Requiring partisan or unprofessional election “audits” or reviews.These bills would establish vague post-election review schemes without the professional standards of traditional audits.
- Usurping control over election results.These bills would give legislators or other state officials direct control over election outcomes.
- Seizing power over election responsibilities.These bills would shift election administration responsibilities away from professional, nonpartisan officials and toward partisan actors in the legislature.
- Imposing disproportionate criminal or other penalties.These bills would create or expand penalties for election officials in the ordinary execution of their jobs, including criminalizing inadvertent mistakes.