Can SC House Freedom Caucus survive after RJ May's child porn indictment?
With more than 11 months away from primary elections, May's previous involvement with the caucus and his pending charges could play a role in whether the hard-line conservative group can survive.
He was a lead strategist for the group and often the target of ire in the House. The group was even referred to as the 'May Freedom Caucus' in a federal case over whether the group could raise and spend money. The Freedom Caucus is a self-defined hard-line conservative faction within the state House chamber.
In July 2024, the group changed leadership with May stepping back from his vice chairman position.
The next month, May's West Columbia house was raided by Homeland Security Investigations and rumors of what the investigation could be about began to swirl. May, who owns a political consulting business, continued to be paid for campaign work by candidates according to state ethics records. In June of this year, May was indicted on 10 counts of distributing child sexual abuse material.
The House Freedom Caucus says its previous connections to May won't affect the caucus in the 2026 primary elections, when opponents may try to make it an issue.
Despite the House Freedom Caucus distancing themselves from May throughout this year's legislative session including saying in December he had been suspended, those in the House GOP Caucus continued to hint at their group's connections to May.
Now, May could become political fodder for the 2026 primary elections depending on how many districts will feature a race with a House GOP backed candidate versus a Freedom Caucus candidate.
Headed into the 2024 primary elections, the House GOP Caucus and the Freedom Caucus battled in more than 30 districts. One member the GOP caucus tried to defend lost to a candidate who eventually joined the Freedom Caucus. It had been an incremental win for the hard-line conservative caucus. Still, by the end of the 2024 elections, Republicans held a 88-seat majority in the House. The Freedom Caucus, however, only had an estimated 16 members and not enough members to stop legislation with the GOP caucus able push forward legislation without the Freedom Caucus.
The SC House Freedom Caucus immediately called on May to resign after he was taken into custody by federal marshals June 11, before details of the charges were publicly released. The group put out a statement that it did not have any contact with May the entire session and said he had not been involved in caucus strategy since August.
The group pointed out that May had been suspended for lack of communication with the Freedom Caucus in December. The group also formally expelled May on June 11.
It was an effort to make sure they were distancing themselves from May and could continue on without him.
'The Freedom Caucus has never been about a single person,' Freedom Caucus Chairman Jordan Pace said in an interview. 'It's not about any one person or any group of people. So that's the message. Our mission is still the same, our values are still the same, and we're going to be pushing for solutions and for better legislation in every turn, just like we have from the start.'
State Rep. Thomas Beach, R-Anderson, insisted members were in the dark about the legal proceedings and investigations taking place before the indictment.
'When I asked him, what's going on, he said, 'my attorney said I can't comment on any of this,'' Beach said before a Freedom Friday event in Lexington.
Beach conceded that May's alleged actions don't help the conservative movement.
'The whole entire issue has given the conservative movement, not just the Freedom Caucus, but the whole entire conservative movement, a black eye,' Beach said.
Beach said he's confident the caucus will survive pointing to how a proposed income tax reform package would raise taxes on 24% of filers and House members have not moved on some issues that the state Republican Party has called for.
'If those people are the same, people are going to keep our primaries open, you're still going to have a Freedom Caucus,' Beach said. 'For us conservatives, it's always been about the issues. At the end of the (day) it's the vote on the issues that matters.'
The ire between the House GOP Caucus and the Freedom Caucus remains.
After May's 10-count indictment was unsealed, state Rep. Micah Caskey, R-Lexington, took to social media to take his jabs at the Freedom Caucus.
'Anybody heard if Jordan Pace and the SC House Freedom Caucus have offered up any explanation for lying about their timeline for their relationship with the FC de facto leader RJ May?' Caskey posted on June 19. 'I suppose they're hoping it blows over.'
May was one of the original founding members of the South Carolina House Freedom Caucus, served as vice chairman, and crafted strategy while a leader.
'When their founder/leader was arrested, what was the SC House Freedom Caucus first instinct? To lie. They just flat out lied. Not involved? Hell, they were sending him money!' Caskey posted on June 13. 'Why couldn't they just say RJ May is a despicable person?'
Since May's arrest and indictment, GOP operatives have pointed out Freedom Caucus members were still paying May after the August raid, according to state ethics records. Among the handful who paid May's business Ivory Tusk were state Rep. Stephen Frank, R-Greenville, who was first elected in 2024, and state Rep. Jay Kilmartin, R-Lexington.
Both Frank and Kilmartin, who had competitive elections in 2024, paid Ivory Tusk after August for campaign work or consulting. Kilmartin had a $5,450 expenditure in September and a $5,000 expenditure in February. Frank made a $1,000 payment in January, records show.
Frank defeated Sarah Curran in his primary election by nearly 15 points and then won his general election over Democrat Stephen Dreyfus by more than 36 percentage points. Kilmartin had a primary challenger whom he defeated by more than 10 points, but no general election challenger.
'RJ wasn't always good about billing right away,' said state Rep. Ryan McCabe, R-Lexington, who also is a Freedom Caucus member.
McCabe also paid Ivory Tusk $3,800 in January for Christmas cards.
'I wouldn't have thought much about asking him to do a Christmas card, because I believed in him,' McCabe said. 'What I knew in January is different than what I'm hearing today.'
Pace defended the payments after the raid, saying May carried out work for those members.
'Everything was still sealed. We didn't know what was going on,' Pace said. 'But more importantly, services had been rendered during the election. They were paying their bills that preceded from their election primaries seven months before that.'
Social media users also point to particular a payment Pace made. In December, Pace sent his $500 in dues to the South Carolina Freedom Caucus, which listed May's address.
Pace said it was because May had set up the bank account for the Freedom Caucus and used his own address. The caucus was unable to get control of the account from May and in 2025 sent dues to a new bank account with the address now being a post office box in Goose Creek, state ethics records show.
Those public records may be used in the 2026 primary elections, if the House GOP tries to oust Freedom Caucus members.
Pace cast doubt on whether that strategy would work.
'When you use other people's ugly situations like this, where people (have) been victimized, and like when you try to use that for political gain, that's despicable, that's the lowest form of politics, and nobody wants that. Nobody should want to want that,' Pace said.
The payments to May ultimately could be too nuanced for campaign mailers, but the timing of the case adjudication could be a factor down the line. If a guilty plea or verdict comes in the spring of next year in the months leading to the primary, it would lead to a return of coverage of a South Carolina Freedom Caucus founding member.
'The complete adjudication of this will be happening months from now, so there's another wave of news they're going to have to deal with,' said Walt Whetsell, the president of Starboard Communications, who has managed campaigns against Freedom Caucus members.
In an interview, Caskey said previous statements and affiliations could hurt the Freedom Caucus.
'The fact that they've chosen to lie about their affiliation with him just opens the door to even more questions,' Caskey said. 'They put out a statement and say, 'Oh, well, actually, we haven't had anything to do with him since August,' never mind the December press conference and never mind the publicly available campaign disclosures where they've been sending money to him.'
But will the Freedom Caucus numbers change?
'I don't think the room will look 100% the same a year from today, and that's because some of them may decide to retire. Some of them will probably run for Congress. Some of them will win, some of them will lose, just like any membership in the General Assembly,' Caskey said.
McCabe, who joined the House the same year as May, has visited with him at the Edgefield County Detention Center, where he is being held pending trial.
McCabe, who declined to disclose the reason for his brief June 17 visit, said he thought May was OK, but still said May was 'demoralized.'
He conceded the charges and details released by investigators surprised him.
'Some things have come out that were a shock to me about his personal life, but that doesn't change that he's my friend,' McCabe said, who emphasized his comments were not on behalf of the Freedom Caucus. 'It's easy in politics to find somebody that will kick you when you're down. All your friends will kick you when you're down … So, as long as he says he's not guilty, then I believe he's entitled to his day in court and his trial and truth will come out.'
McCabe said it is May's decision on whether to resign from the House, despite calls from the Freedom Caucus, the South Carolina Republican Party and the Lexington County Republican Party for May to resign.
'RJ needs to think seriously about the consequences to all the people that have been connected with him, and I trust he'll do that. I haven't had a conversation with him about that,' McCabe said.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


CBS News
33 minutes ago
- CBS News
Wisconsin Supreme Court's liberal majority strikes down 176-year-old abortion ban
The Wisconsin Supreme Court's liberal majority struck down the state's 176-year-old abortion ban on Wednesday, ruling 4-3 that it was superseded by a newer state law that criminalizes abortions only after a fetus can survive outside the womb. State lawmakers adopted the ban in 1849, making it a felony when anyone other than the mother "intentionally destroys the life of an unborn child." It was in effect until 1973, when the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion nationwide nullified it. Legislators never officially repealed the ban, however, and conservatives argued that the U.S. Supreme Court's 2022 decision to overturn Roe reactivated it. Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul, a Democrat, filed a lawsuit that year arguing that the ban was trumped by abortion restrictions legislators enacted during the nearly half-century that Roe was in effect. Kaul specifically cited a 1985 law that essentially permits abortions until viability. Some babies can survive with medical help after 21 weeks of gestation. Sheboygan County District Attorney Joel Urmanski, a Republican, defended the ban in court, arguing that the 1849 ban could coexist with the newer abortion restrictions, just as different penalties for the same crime coexist. Dane County Circuit Judge Diane Schlipper ruled in 2023 that the 1849 ban outlaws feticide — which she defined as the killing of a fetus without the mother's consent — but not consensual abortions. Abortions have been available in the state since that ruling but the state Supreme Court decision gives providers and patients more certainty that abortions will remain legal in Wisconsin. Urmanski asked the state Supreme Court to overturn Schlipper's ruling without waiting for a decision from a lower appellate court. It was expected as soon as the justices took the case that they would overturn the ban. Liberals hold a 4-3 majority on the court and one of them, Janet Protasiewicz, openly stated on the campaign trail that she supports abortion rights. Democratic-backed Susan Crawford defeated conservative Brad Schimel for an open seat on the court in April, ensuring liberals will maintain their 4-3 edge until at least 2028. Crawford has not been sworn in yet and was not part of Wednesday's ruling. She'll play pivotal role, though, in a separate Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin lawsuit challenging the 1849 ban's constitutionality. The high court decided last year to take that case. It's still pending.


CBS News
35 minutes ago
- CBS News
CHP vehicle involved in single-car crash in Culver City; 3 injured
At least 3 injured after CHP vehicle involved in crash in Culver City At least 3 injured after CHP vehicle involved in crash in Culver City At least 3 injured after CHP vehicle involved in crash in Culver City A California Highway Patrol vehicle was involved in a single-car crash in Culver City early Wednesday morning, police say, leaving multiple people with injuries. The Culver City Police Department said the crash occurred at about 12:30 a.m. in the area of Green Valley Circle and Bristol Parkway. The crash involved at least one CHP officer. Images from the scene show an SUV with CHP markings with damage to the front. The SUV was off of the main road and on a dirty patch near several trees; it wasn't clear as of 6 a.m. whether the vehicle collided with a tree. Three were injured after a CHP officer was involved in a single-car crash in Culver City just after midnight Wednesday morning. As of Wednesday morning, it wasn't clear how many of the three injured people were officers. At least one of the three sustained an injury that didn't necessitate transportation to a hospital, police said. It's not yet clear how the crash occurred or if the vehicle was in pursuit at the time of the collision. No additional details were immediately made available. Authorities asked the public to avoid the area between Green Valley Circle to Uplander Way as investigations played out.
Yahoo
37 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Fact check: Medicaid cuts for immigrants in Trump's ‘big, beautiful bill'
(NewsNation) — The White House has posted a 'mythbuster' fact sheet defending its proposed Medicaid changes in President Donald Trump's 'big beautiful bill' — but is it accurate? The nearly 1,000-page megabill outlines the removal of 'at least 1.4 million' immigrants who are in the United States unlawfully from Medicaid, the administration said. According to the White House, doing so would strengthen Medicaid for 'the American citizens for whom the program was designed — pregnant women, children, people with disabilities, low-income seniors, and other vulnerable low-income families.' That's not entirely true. No, immigrants who have entered and remained in the U.S. illegally are not eligible for Medicaid. Although they might benefit from some of its services — including emergency care — they aren't eligible for federally funded Medicaid coverage. The Congressional Budget Office and research organizations such as the Kaiser Family Foundation and Georgetown University's McCourt School of Public Policy corroborate these restrictions. Trump-Musk feud reignites over the 'big, beautiful bill' The White House's 1.4 million estimate appears to refer to those with questionable immigration status who will lose coverage due to reductions in state health care programs currently providing them with assistance. These programs are funded by the states, not through federal Medicaid dollars. Some emergency services provided by hospitals are available to people lacking a Medicaid-eligible immigration status. Services include 'those requiring immediate attention to prevent death, serious harm or disability, although states have some discretion to determine reimbursable services,' according to the KFF. 5 takeaways as Senate ships Trump's megabill to House The foundation estimated emergency care for undocumented patients accounted for less than 1% of Medicaid spending from 2017 to 2023. Trump and most congressional Republicans claim the reductions aren't true cuts, arguing that no one who should be on Medicaid will lose benefits. 'We're cutting $1.7 trillion in this bill, and you're not going to feel any of it,' Trump said at the White House last week. 5 takeaways as Senate ships Trump's megabill to House But experts and health advocates say a recent CBO analysis confirms that despite Trump's repeated pledges to only cut waste, fraud and abuse in Medicaid, the legislation would enact an unprecedented reduction in the program currently used by more than 70 million low-income Americans. 'This bill isn't being crafted to improve health care in America, or to improve the Medicaid program, or to improve the [ACA]. The purpose of these cuts in the bill is to try to find savings to pay for tax cuts,' said Andrea Ducas, vice president of health policy at the Democratic-aligned Center for American Progress. NewsNation partner The Hill contributed to this report. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.