SC congresswoman sues 1 of the men she accused of sex crimes, claiming he defamed her in response
U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace spoke at the Greenville County GOP convention at the Greenville Convention Center on Monday April 14, 2025. (Photo by Mark Susko/Special to the SC Daily Gazette)
A lawsuit filed Monday by U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace claims one of the men she targeted in a shocking speech in Congress defamed her on social media in the weeks afterward.
The 1st District congresswoman accuses Eric Bowman of 'repeatedly and maliciously' damaging her reputation following her hour-long speech in February, for which she's being sued for defamation by one of the other men she named. Bowman has said more lawsuits are likely, but he meant against her.
All four men, who include Mace's ex-fiancé, have vehemently denied her accusations from the U.S. House floor that they committed 'some of the most heinous crimes against women imaginable.'
Bowman, a Sullivans Island software developer, called the lawsuit filed in Charleston County court 'headline theater.'
Mace claims Bowman 'acted with reckless disregard to the truth and with actual malice towards Rep. Mace through his utter disregard of and callousness to her rights as a South Carolinian in purposely making such knowingly false declarations,' the lawsuit reads.
The lawsuit cites Bowman's posts on X, formerly Twitter, between Feb. 27 — 17 days after her speech — and March 17.
In that nearly hour-long speech broadcast live on C-SPAN, Mace accused the men of an array of sexual crimes, including raping and videotaping women without their knowledge.
Mace said she was among the victims. All four men immediately denied her claims.
At the time, the state Law Enforcement Division confirmed it was investigating Mace's ex-fiancé. A spokeswoman said Monday the agency had nothing new to report as the investigation continues.
No charges have been filed.
Bowman and Mace have blasted each other in social media posts since the speech.
The posts that Mace cites in her lawsuit include Bowman's allegations that Mace illegally used her position on the House Veterans' Affair Committee to steer VA contracts to friends and political allies.
'Bowman knew these statements were objectively false when they were made and acted with a reckless disregard for the truth in repeatedly making such statements without support or any attempt to verify the veracity of such statements,' the lawsuit reads.
In addition, it continued, 'Bowman has also spent months smearing Rep. Mace's name and reputation through wide range of vile, contemptible, and repugnant character attacks.'
Responding to the lawsuit, Bowman said his social media activity represents the truth.
'My posts — based on documents, public records, witness testimony, and materials from her own staff— present evidence of hacking, blackmail, misuse of private images, misappropriated tax dollars, and retaliation against rival VA contractors,' he wrote to the SC Daily Gazette in a text.
'Those posts remain publicly available on my X feed (@_ericbowman) for anyone who wants to review them. I acted in good faith and without malice, and I will present this evidence under oath,' he said.
Defamation cases are harder for public figures to prove. Their claims must meet the 'actual malice' standard — that whoever they're suing knew the information was wrong or didn't care and recklessly spread it.
'I'm confident the First Amendment — and the documented facts — will prevail. Nancy Mace can't be trusted,' Bowman's text concluded.
While posts included in the lawsuit stop March 17 — three days after a defamation was filed against her in U.S. District Court in Charleston — Bowman's posts about her continued.
In an April 9 post that tagged Mace, he wrote, 'What if this isn't just politics or drama? What if we're witnessing a real mental breakdown — public, painful, and unchecked?'
Mace announced her lawsuit against him on X: 'Let this be a warning to all. I didn't come to play,' she wrote.
The suit against Bowman comes a month after he was arrested on unrelated charges of stalking and harassment.
He said those April 8 charges came from his estranged wife, who he claimed he has not spoken to since November 2023. He denied the allegations and continued to criticize her on X after he got out of jail, calling the accusations 'weaponized law enforcement.'
Bowman turned himself in at the jail and was released later the same day.
Mace has yet to respond legally to the lawsuit filed in March by Brian Musgrave of Fort Mill.
The case could test the limits of the 'speech or debate' clause of the U.S. Constitution, which shields members of Congress from lawsuits for what is said in either chamber. Musgrave contends her posts after the speech aren't protected.
Rep. Mace sued by 1 of the men she accused of being a sexual predator
Musgrave's suit came two weeks after his lawyers, Eric Bland and Ronnie Richter, warned Mace in a letter to either reveal evidence of the allegations, apologize or prepare to be sued.
Mace has never responded directly to the lawsuit, even to reporters. Instead, she's repeatedly referred questions back to her House speech.
'She has been uncharacteristically quiet (about the lawsuit) for a woman who isn't afraid to get in front of the microphone,' Bland told the SC Daily Gazette on Monday.
The lawsuits loom as Mace mulls a run for governor. Mace hasn't officially announced but it's widely expected that she's going to be part of a crowded field vying for the GOP nomination.
Gov. Henry McMaster, who's already the state's oldest and longest-serving elected governor, can't seek another term.
Others expected to run include Attorney General Alan Wilson and Lt. Gov. Pam Evette.
Mace has taken jabs at both on social media. U.S. Rep. Ralph Norman, as well as state Sens. Josh Kimbrell and Sean Bennett are also considering bids.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
17 minutes ago
- New York Times
Cuomo Comes Under Fire at Debate Over Nursing Home Covid Deaths
Andrew Cuomo's actions during the early stages of the coronavirus pandemic, and how they have may have led to a disproportionate number of deaths at nursing homes while he was governor, became a flashpoint in Wednesday night's debate. Mr. Cuomo defended the state's leadership during the crisis, suggesting that New York ranked 38th in nursing home deaths, and pushed back against accusations that his administration undercounted nursing home deaths. But New York's attorney general found that the Cuomo administration undercounted nursing home deaths by several thousand. Mr. Cuomo later acknowledged as much, attributing the lower figure to fears that the Trump administration would use the data as a political weapon. Mr. Cuomo has come under fire for guidance, issued by the New York State Health Department in March 2020, that directed nursing homes to readmit patients who had tested positive for the coronavirus. Opponents of Mr. Cuomo assert that this guidance led to the unnecessary deaths of thousands of older New Yorkers in nursing homes. Mr. Cuomo has maintained that his administration was following federal guidelines. The problems for Mr. Cuomo and his aides worsened after his administration published a report later in 2020 shifting blame for those deaths. Reporting by The New York Times revealed how Cuomo and his top aides had edited the report to conceal how many nursing home residents died in the pandemic, a finding that congressional investigators also reached. Several state and federal entities, including the Justice Department, looked into Mr. Cuomo's actions but did not pursue criminal charges. Mr. Cuomo would not answer when asked directly whether he had personally rewritten portions of the 2020 report. More recently, The Times reported that the Justice Department had opened a criminal investigation into Mr. Cuomo and whether he lied to Congress. It came about a month after a Republican House committee chairman reiterated his call for Mr. Cuomo to be prosecuted for decisions he made during the pandemic. The debate moderators pressed Mr. Cuomo on whether he had lied to Congress. He said he had not lied.
Time Magazine
22 minutes ago
- Time Magazine
Trump's ‘Big Beautiful Bill' Stumbles in Senate as Musk Ramps Up Bid to ‘Kill' It
President Donald Trump's sprawling tax-and-spending proposal—touted as the centerpiece of his second-term agenda—is facing intensifying resistance in the Senate, as fresh concerns about its impact on the deficit and a ramped-up campaign by Elon Musk to torpedo the entire package threaten to derail the legislation's fragile path to passage. At the center of the turmoil on Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill' is a sobering new assessment from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, which reported Wednesday that the bill would add $2.4 trillion to federal deficits over the next decade while stripping health coverage from nearly 11 million Americans, largely through deep Medicaid cuts and the imposition of new work requirements. That analysis sparked alarm among some Senate Republicans, several of whom are demanding substantial changes. 'I think Congress is sort of like a bad behaving teenager when it comes to spending,' Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, one of the Republicans threatening to vote against the bill, told TIME on Wednesday. 'If you had a teenager that you were giving $100 a week and they wasted all of it on gambling or on booze, would you give them $200?' White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt and other prominent Republicans tried to dismiss the CBO's projections by arguing its analysis was flawed or biased. But fiscal hawks in the Senate remained dug in, buoyed by former Trump advisor Elon Musk, who extended his all-out offensive against the bill. A day after using his vast social media reach to brand the bill a 'disgusting abomination,' he posted more than two dozen messages on X on Wednesday attacking the legislation, as well as urging his followers to call Congress and 'KILL the BILL.' Musk's ire appears especially focused on how the bill's expansion of the deficit would erase the cost-cutting he hoped to accomplish with the Department of Government Efficiency, which he led under the Trump Administration. He has also expressed concerns with provisions in the House-passed bill that would terminate clean energy tax credits and electric vehicle subsidies established under the Inflation Reduction Act. Tesla Energy, Musk's solar and battery company, has warned that ending those credits 'would threaten America's energy independence and the reliability of our grid.' The sharp reversal has blindsided some Republicans, who were counting on Musk's tacit support. House Speaker Mike Johnson, who has spearheaded the bill's passage, tried to stem the fallout by reaching out to Musk directly. 'I hope he comes around,' Johnson said Wednesday, though he added that Musk has not returned his call. Inside the Senate, Johnson's broader strategy—pushing through House priorities quickly and with minimal changes—is beginning to unravel. Senate Majority Leader John Thune of South Dakota acknowledged that significant changes to the bill are now unavoidable. 'We'll make some modifications to it, strengthen and improve it,' Thune said Tuesday. 'But at the end of the day, the math is simple—51 in the Senate, 218 in the House. That's what we're working toward.' One potential modification Thune has expressed interest in is scaling back the $40,000 state and local tax (SALT) deduction cap in the House version of the bill, an increase from the current $10,000 cap that House Republicans from high-tax states secured as a concession. But not all Republicans agree with the additional spending: 'There really isn't a single Republican senator who cares much about the SALT issue,' Thune told reporters as he departed a meeting with Trump and Senate Republicans on Wednesday evening, saying that they discussed ways to dial that money back. It's a move that could alienate House Republicans from New York and New Jersey, who say their support is contingent on the SALT provision. "Let's be clear — no SALT, no deal," New York Republican Mike Lawler said Wednesday in a post on X. Additionally, the bill's sweeping changes to Medicaid, such as imposing new work requirements, are a sticking point. Republican Senators Josh Hawley of Missouri and Jim Justice of West Virginia have raised red flags over a provision that would eliminate provider taxes—mechanisms that states use to fund Medicaid—which they argue could shutter rural hospitals. Hawley is also opposed to a so-called 'sick tax' in the bill, which would impose new charges on low-income patients for medical visits. Other Republican Senators, including Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, may also put up roadblocks over potential cuts to Medicaid. Trump has personally intervened, holding calls with Sens. Hawley, Paul, and Scott. But there is little evidence he has swayed skeptics. Paul, a libertarian-leaning lawmaker who has vocally pushed back on many Trump Administration policies, told TIME that he plans to vote against the bill over its provision to raise the debt ceiling by trillions of dollars. 'Congress has been acting irresponsibly for decades,' he said. 'We spend $2 trillion more than to come in. They should have a very narrow leash. The only debt ceiling they get should be very, very narrow in time and very, very small in amount. And the more we vote on the debt ceiling, the better. I'd vote on it every three months.' Trump, meanwhile, renewed his calls on Wednesday for scrapping the debt ceiling altogether. The growing litany of disputes has created a daunting legislative gauntlet for Trump's signature bill. Senate committees are now beginning to draft their own version, starting with less controversial sections and leaving the most divisive elements—Medicaid, energy, taxes—for later. Should the Senate approve any amended version, it must still clear the House once again—no small task given the narrow margins and the emboldened dissent among House Republicans. The stakes are high not just for Trump, but for Republicans heading into a contentious midterm season. Failure to extend Trump's 2017 tax cuts would translate into a tax increase for many Americans. Trump's legislation would also boost spending on defense and border security, while reducing spending on Medicaid and food stamps.
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Judge blocks Trump administration's effort to eliminate Job Corps
By Dietrich Knauth NEW YORK (Reuters) -A U.S. judge on Wednesday temporarily stopped the Trump administration from moving ahead with an effort to eliminate the Job Corps, the largest U.S. job training program for low-income youth. U.S. District Judge Andrew Carter in Manhattan issued a temporary restraining order in a lawsuit filed by a trade group representing contractors that operate Job Corps centers. Carter ordered the government not to terminate Job Corps contractors or stop work at Job Corps centers until a further ruling in the case, and he ordered the Labor Department to appear at a court hearing on June 17. The lawsuit alleges that the U.S. Department of Labor is violating federal law and its own regulations by abruptly shuttering the program, a plan the agency announced last week. Job Corps was created by Congress in 1964 and allows 16-to-24-year-olds from disadvantaged backgrounds to obtain high school diplomas or an equivalent, vocational certificates and licenses and on-the-job training. The program currently serves about 25,000 people at 120 Job Corps centers run by contractors. The Labor Department in announcing the end of the program said it was not cost effective, had a low graduation rate and was not placing participants in stable jobs. The department also said there had been thousands of instances of violence, drug use and security breaches at Job Corps centers. The National Job Corps Association and other plaintiffs in Tuesday's lawsuit said the Labor Department does not have the power to dismantle a program established and funded by Congress. Shuttering Job Corps is a small piece of a broader effort by Trump, a Republican, and his appointees to drastically shrink the federal bureaucracy, including by getting rid of some offices and agencies altogether.
