Part of: Mace vs. the Solicitor: the campaign against the prosecutor in her own cases (2025) · Assignment Desk Works, LLC v. Alexis Berg · Musgrave v. Mace (2:25-cv-01823-RMG) · Litigation Overview & Court-Filing Index
'The solicitor leaked evidence': Mace accuses the prosecutor in her own cases on a national podcast
On June 19, 2025, on the PBD Podcast, Rep. Nancy Mace named Ninth Judicial Circuit Solicitor Scarlett Wilson, the elected chief prosecutor whose circuit would handle the cases arising from Mace's own allegations, and accused her of leaking evidence, refusing to prosecute rape, and having 'inserted yourself into this investigation and … obstructed the investigation.' Wilson answered that her office was not running the investigation, SLED was, and said 'I have no idea what the Congresswoman is referring to.' The Post and Courier reported that when it asked Mace's office, repeatedly, for evidence of the obstruction claim, none was provided. The underlying allegations are unproven and contested.
The reporting credit here belongs to The Post and Courier, whose politics reporter Caitlin Byrd reviewed the podcast appearance and pressed Mace's office for substantiation.
On June 19, 2025, Rep. Nancy Mace appeared on the PBD Podcast, host Patrick Bet-David's show, and turned to the elected prosecutor for her home circuit. Ninth Judicial Circuit Solicitor Scarlett Wilson is the chief state prosecutor for Charleston and Berkeley Counties: the office that would carry to trial any charges arising from the allegations Mace had been making since her February 2025 House floor speech. On the podcast, Mace named Wilson and accused her of crimes against the very cases connected to Mace.
Mace's full PBD Podcast appearance, published June 19, 2025. Her remarks about Solicitor Wilson are a segment within the interview; the quotes below are as reported by The Post and Courier.
What she said
On who she blamed for an evidence leak, as reported by The Post and Courier:
"I believe it was the solicitor who leaked evidence to people who shouldn't have had it. The solicitor, Scarlett Wilson is her name."
On Wilson's record and motives:
"[She] doesn't want to prosecute rape cases."
"She doesn't believe rape victims. She's got a political bias against me."
And the accusation Mace built her threatened lawsuit around, that the prosecutor had personally interfered with the case:
"I believe you can be sued. I don't believe you can be protected by qualified immunity because of the way you have inserted yourself into this investigation and have obstructed the investigation."
What the prosecutor said back
Wilson denied the claims. Asked by The Post and Courier to respond, she said:
"I have no idea what the Congresswoman is referring to."
Wilson's office made the structural point that frames everything else: the active probe Mace was describing belonged to the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division (SLED), not to the Solicitor, and solicitors prosecute cases only after a law-enforcement investigation concludes and an arrest is made on probable cause. Her office was not running the investigation Mace accused her of obstructing.
The Post and Courier reported that when it asked Mace's office, multiple times, for any evidence to support the obstruction accusation, none was provided.
The accusation, reversed
Mace told a national audience that Wilson had "inserted yourself into this investigation and … obstructed the investigation." By the public record, the person who had inserted herself was the one speaking: a sitting member of Congress and the self-described victim and complaining witness, in what reads as publicly branding the elected prosecutor for her own circuit a criminal, on no stated evidence per the Post and Courier, while that prosecutor's office was not even the agency running the case. It was the opening move of a months-long public campaign to discredit and remove the prosecutor in matters connected to Mace, see Mace vs. the Solicitor.
The underlying dispute is the subject of ongoing civil litigation and a separate SLED investigation. All allegations on every side remain unproven and contested: the men Mace named deny her allegations; Solicitor Wilson denies Mace's allegations against her; no underlying matter has been adjudicated. Nothing here is a finding of fact. For background see People in the Public Record and Scarlett Wilson.
Sources & related coverage:
- The podcast: Nancy Mace on the PBD Podcast (YouTube), published June 19, 2025.
- The reporting: Post and Courier, "U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace accuses Charleston's Republican prosecutor of obstruction in her assault case" (Caitlin Byrd).
- Wilson's denial, contemporaneously: Caitlin Byrd on X, "Solicitor Scarlett Wilson denied all of Mace's claims, saying her office is not involved in the investigation in question. SLED is the law enforcement agency investigating."
- Related: Mace vs. the Solicitor · 'Recuse themselves': the August 18 press release · Scarlett Wilson
Read next
August 18, 2025 · Dispatch'Recuse themselves': Mace's official press release demands the prosecutor's removal and a state investigation into her
On August 18, 2025, Rep. Nancy Mace issued an official congressional press release headlined 'Solicitor Scarlett Wilson Tipped Off Abuser and Leaked Evidence to Harm Victim,' demanding that the elected Ninth Circuit Solicitor recuse from 'any and all cases related to this victim,' be removed from all domestic-violence prosecutions, and face 'a full and immediate state investigation into Wilson's misconduct.' Wilson responded that prosecutors are 'required by law and ethical rules to provide all relevant information to the defense' and that she would not 'play a part in the circus sideshow.' The allegations on all sides are unproven and contested.
December 31, 2025 · DispatchA 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.
December 19, 2025 · DispatchIn her own sworn Answer, Mace admits she 'placed an air tag on Bryant's car for one day in August 2023'
In her December 19, 2025 Answer to Patrick Bryant's Third-Party Complaint, Rep. Nancy Mace admits under oath that she placed a tracking device on Bryant's car and attempted to access his laptop, while denying Bryant's allegation that she intended to weaponize what she found. The filing is Mace's own account, in her own words, on the public court record.
December 1, 2025 · DispatchWhile 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.
November 28, 2025 · DispatchTwo 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.
November 26, 2025 · DispatchUnder 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.