House GOP leader files ethics complaint against South Carolina lawmaker indicted on federal child sex crime charges
COLUMBIA, S.C. (WCBD) — A top Republican in the South Carolina House is calling for the expulsion of a now-suspended state representative accused of using a social messaging app to distribute child sexual abuse material.
State Rep. RJ May (R-Lexington), 38, was taken into custody June 11 in Lexington County following a more than one-year-long investigation into alleged child sexual exploitation crimes.
A Greenville grand jury indicted May on 10 counts of distributing child sexual abuse material, and a federal judge ordered him Thursday to remain behind bars while awaiting trial.
House Majority Leader Davey Hiott (R-Pickens) said in a statement Friday that he has filed a complaint with the House Ethics Committee to investigate 'not only Mr. May, but his business dealings with other members of the State House of Representatives.'
'First and foremost, we are deeply disturbed by the charges against Mr. May, and we stand fully behind law enforcement in ensuring that anyone who commits these crimes is punished to the fullest extent of the law,' Hiott said, adding 'The conduct these charges allege are reprehensible, vile, and have no place in our society, let alone in the House of Representatives.'
It marks the first step in the process toward formally expelling May from the chamber, which would ultimately require a two-thirds vote once the ethics investigation has concluded.
House Speaker Murrell Smith (R-Sumter) confirmed June 12 that May had been suspended without pay but declined further comment.
State law requires the House Speaker to immediately suspend any member indicted on a felony charge in state or federal court. The suspension remains in effect until the member is acquitted, convicted, pleads guilty, or pleads no contest.
The governor cannot unilaterally expel members of the General Assembly.
The West Columbia lawmaker has represented District 88 since 2021 and helped form the hardline conservative South Carolina Freedom Caucus. He also founded Ivory Tusk Consulting, a political consulting and public relations firm for Republicans.
Freedom Caucus Chair Jordan Pace (R-Berkeley) said May was expelled from the group following news of the indictment but has not been involved with its operations since last August.
Pace, along with other members, has called for May's immediate resignation.
Prosecutors said the investigation began in April 2024 after the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children received a cyber-tip from the social messaging app Kik, which had flagged several videos depicting child sexual abuse shared from the user 'joebidennnn69.'
At least 10 videos were shared from the account, which was later traced to May's West Columbia home IP address and mobile device.
Agents with Homeland Security Investigations seized nearly three dozen electronic devices belonging to May last August as part of the ongoing criminal investigation, according to a federal court filing. Those included laptops, cell phones, hard drives, and other devices.
A motion filed by federal prosecutors states that May used Kik to participate in 'multiple group chats dedicated to the trading of child pornography,' distributing approximately 220 different videos about 479 times over five days in early April, including instances where the same video was shared multiple times.
The document contains graphic details about the contents of the videos and states that May's activity on the app 'reveals he has sexual interest in children the same age as his own [two] children' and a 'sexual interest in incest' between parents and children.
This story is breaking and may be updated.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
Trump's gamble on Iran: Nuclear threat ended? Or the start of 'endless war'?
It's Donald Trump's war now. The decision to bomb Iran revealed the conflict between some of the president's fundamental impulses. The highest hope of President Trump's bomb attack on Iran: A rogue nuclear program that had defied a half-dozen of his predecessors has finally been destroyed. The deepest fear: Just four years after the chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan ended America's longest war, the United States is now enmeshed in another war in a volatile region, with perilous and uncertain consequences. "Our objective was the destruction of Iran's nuclear enrichment capacity and a stop to the nuclear threat posed by the world's number one state sponsor of terror," Trump said in a late-night announcement in the East Room on June 21, interrupting Americans' Saturday night plans with news that B-2 bombers had dropped the world's most powerful conventional bombs on three sites seen as crucial to Tehran's nuclear program. "Iran, the bully of the Middle East, must now make peace." That's the calculation behind "Operation Midnight Hammer," anyway − that despite its initial bluster Tehran will be forced to abandon its nuclear program. But Trump acknowledged there were other possibilities. "Remember, there are many targets left," he said, surrounded by a solemn-looking trio of advisers − Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. "If peace does not come quickly, we will go after those other targets with precision, speech and skill." A war between Trump's fundamental impulses The White House debate whether to launch the bombers put at odds some of Trump's most fundamental impulses. One is his fervent opposition in all three of his presidential campaigns against "forever wars," including the costly and controversial conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. His "America First" agenda reflects a determination to focus less on places like Ukraine and more on challenges close to home. While most Republican congressional leaders praised the president for the bombing, some prominent in the MAGA movement did not. "This is not our fight," Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene complained on social media. "Every time America is on the verge of greatness, we get involved in another foreign war." On the other hand, Trump is also famously impatient with problems that have frustrated standard solutions. Witness, for instance, his willingness to press the limits of the law in identifying and deporting millions of undocumented immigrants. The lengthy efforts at negotiation with Iran, like much of diplomacy, seemed unlikely to reach the sort of dramatic and decisive conclusion he favors. The bombing of Iran also reflects his alliance with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who argues that Iran's nuclear program poses an existential threat to his country. For the prime minister, achieving his decades-old dream of destroying that program is the stuff of legacy. For Trump's legacy, too − a powerful message for a president who cannot run for the Oval Office again. Netanyahu struck that chord. "Congratulations, President Trump," he said in Tel Aviv. "His leadership today has created a pivot in history that can help lead the Middle East and beyond to a future of prosperity and peace." Congressional leaders notified as planes headed home For better or worse, this will be Trump's war. For one thing, he didn't seek the approval of Congress, which under the Constitution has the right to declare war though the president has broad authority to order the use of military force. The War Powers Act, passed after President Nixon's secret bombing of Cambodia during the Vietnam War, requires presidents to notify Congress and limits the length of deployments. After the U.S. bombers had left Iranian air space, the administration immediately notified congressional leaders, Hegseth told reporters at a Pentagon briefing Sunday. Virginia Sen. Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, said Trump had risked dragging the United States into a long war "without consulting Congress, without a clear strategy, without regard to the consistent conclusions of the intelligence community, and without explaining to the American people what's at stake." Those will be the elements of the debate ahead, in echoes of the Iraq war. How serious was the Iranian nuclear threat? And how will voters weigh the stakes and the cost? In Istanbul, Iran's foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, accused Trump of having "deceived his own voters" by launching the strike. The U.S. administration holds "sole and full responsibility for the consequences of its actions," he said. But he didn't specify whether Iran would retaliate against U.S. forces in the region. Hours after the bunker-buster bombs were dropped, Iran launched a new round of missiles toward Israel. On Monday, the foreign minister plans to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin, an ally but one who has his own war to fight.
an hour ago
Hegseth insists Iran strikes were 'intentionally limited' as US faces prospect of escalating war
After the U.S. hammered Iran with a series of "precision strikes" against three of its key nuclear facilities on Saturday, Defense Secretary Pete Hegesth insisted that the operation was "intentionally limited" as the prospect of wider war loomed. 'Well, anything can happen in conflict. We acknowledge that, but the scope of this was intentionally limited,' Hegseth said during a press conference Sunday with Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Dan Caine. Many lawmakers and even some of the president's allies were against striking Iran after President Trump's vow to keep the U.S. out of foreign conflicts and in the wake of decades of open-ended conflicts around the Middle East. Specifically, Hegseth said that the goal of the U.S. mission was not regime change, a prospect that has been left open by Israel. And he said both public and private channels were open with the Iranians in an attempt to bring them to the table for negotiations. 'They understand precisely what the American position is, precisely what steps they can take to allow for peace, and we hope they do so,' he said. Hegseth also pointed out that the strikes were targeted only at Iran's nuclear program, not its military members or civilian population. "The United States does not seek war," Hegseth said. "But let me be clear, we will act swiftly and decisively when our people, our partners, or our interests are threatened." Hegseth's remarks echoed those of Trump on Saturday night, when he said that peace was the goal of the mission and warned of Iran taking further steps against American interests. "There will be either peace or there will be tragedy for Iran, far greater than we have witnessed over the last eight days," Trump said. "Remember, there are many targets left. Tonight's was the most difficult of them all by far, and perhaps the most lethal. "But if peace does not come quickly, we will go after those other targets with precision, speed and skill. Most of them can be taken out in a matter of minutes." On ABC News' "This Week" Sunday, Vice President JD Vance tried to make clear"we're not at war with Iran, Jon. We're at war with Iran's nuclear program." After the strikes, Democrats and some Republicans criticized Trump's move, with some calling it "unconstitutional." "Donald Trump promised to bring peace to the Middle East. He has failed to deliver on that promise," said House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries, of New York. "The risk of war has now dramatically increased, and I pray for the safety of our troops in the region who have been put in harm's way."
Miami Herald
an hour ago
- Miami Herald
Donald Trump's SNAP Benefit Cut Plans Suffer Blow
A plan by Republicans to shift a portion of federal food stamp costs to state governments suffered a major setback after the Senate parliamentarian found it would violate chamber rules. The blocked provision was an attempt to reduce federal spending on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), affecting more than 40 million low-income Americans who rely on food aid. The shift would have transferred major SNAP costs to the states, requiring them to pay at least 5 percent—and potentially more—of benefit costs, which analysts warned could result in significant cuts to nutrition support. The parliamentarian's decision places additional pressure on the bill's champions to find alternative means to fund tax cuts without imperiling food assistance, Medicaid, or other federal support programs. The provision, a cornerstone of Republican efforts to offset the costs of President Donald Trump's multitrillion-dollar tax and spending legislation, has been ruled inadmissible under Senate rules, sending GOP leaders scrambling to revise the mega bill. The ruling, issued by Senate parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough, came as the package prepared for a vote. While her opinions are advisory, they are rarely ignored in lawmaking practice. Republican lawmakers are now searching for new savings as they continue to advance Trump's legislative priorities despite the setback. MacDonough declared the SNAP cost-sharing plan noncompliant with the chamber's budget reconciliation rules, specifically the Byrd Rule, which bars certain policy measures from being attached to budget bills. The proposal would have shifted billions of dollars in SNAP costs from the federal government to the states, creating a new fiscal obligation for state governments and threatening coverage for millions. House Passes Bill with GOP SNAP Cuts The House passed the broader tax and spending package along party lines in May 2025, including a provision to require states to fund at least 5 percent of SNAP benefits and more for high error rates. The House-passed measure's SNAP provision was projected to save about $128 billion. Republican leaders had hoped these savings would help offset the bill's $4.5 trillion in tax cuts and new spending. Other Key Provisions Beyond SNAP, the package includes an extension and expansion of individual and business tax cuts, new work requirements for Medicaid recipients, cuts to federal health and nutrition programs, increased military and border security funding, and the elimination of taxes on tips for service workers. GOP Paths Forward Republican leaders, including Senate Agriculture Committee Chair John Boozman of Arkansas, said they were exploring options to keep the legislation on track while still delivering savings elsewhere. Options range from modifying the disputed SNAP provision to removing it entirely or risking a procedural vote requiring 60 votes—an unlikely scenario in the current Senate. Impact on SNAP Recipients The plan would have expanded work requirements to older adults (up to age 65), a component that remains in the bill for now. Democrats and anti-hunger advocates warned of significant harm to those in need, with more than 3 million individuals projected to lose food stamp access based on Congressional Budget Office estimates. Additional Rulings Expected The Senate parliamentarian is also expected to rule on other elements in the bill, including limits on immigrant eligibility for nutrition aid and changes to federal agencies, with further decisions likely to shape the final legislation. Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar, the top Democrat on the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee, said: "We will keep fighting to protect families in need," opposing shifts in SNAP costs to states, which she said would result in significant benefit cuts. Arkansas Senator John Boozman, chair of the Senate Agriculture Committee, said Republicans are "exploring options" to comply with Senate rules, while supporting those reliant on SNAP. Senate Republicans are expected to revise the bill to comply with the parliamentarian's rulings or drop the contested SNAP provisions. Further decisions from the adviser on other elements of the megabill are anticipated before any final Senate vote. This article contains reporting from The Associated Press. Related Articles When Are July 2025 SNAP Payments Coming?Republicans Out Of Step With Voters On Medicaid FundingNew York State Facing Lawsuit Over SNAP BenefitsSNAP Recipients Get Extra Money This Month in California 2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
