The South Carolina Senate moved closer to approving a congressional redistricting plan supported by the White House on Saturday, advancing legislation that could reshape the state’s political landscape. The proposal is designed to increase Republican chances of capturing South Carolina’s only Democratic-held congressional seat, but it has sparked growing legal and political concerns.
Senators voted 27-17 to give the measure preliminary approval. One additional procedural vote is expected Tuesday, which could clear the way for the bill to reach the governor’s desk later in the week. The timing has become a major point of controversy because early voting is scheduled to begin Tuesday, and thousands of absentee ballots have already been submitted.
Democrats argue that changing district boundaries while voting is underway threatens election fairness. Senate Minority Leader Brad Hutto criticized the effort, saying lawmakers risk disenfranchising voters who may already be casting ballots while the legislation is still under consideration.
Opposition has also emerged from within Republican ranks. Sen. Chip Campsen warned that abandoning the current congressional map could create unnecessary legal challenges. He noted that existing district boundaries have already survived scrutiny in both state and federal courts and predicted that the state Supreme Court could reject the new proposal because of the process used to advance it.
The debate also produced an unusual dispute over scheduling. Senators initially planned to continue discussions on Sunday, prompting objections from lawmakers who argued that the chamber should not meet on a day traditionally reserved for worship and family activities. Following criticism from both Democratic and Republican senators, leaders canceled Sunday and Monday sessions.
Under the proposal, congressional primary elections would be postponed until August, while other statewide contests would remain on schedule. Ballots for June primaries would still include congressional races, but those votes could be invalidated if the new map becomes law. As the debate continues, supporters and critics alike acknowledge that the outcome could have significant political and legal consequences.
