South Carolina AG Candidate David Stumbo Draws Sharp Contrasts With Rivals Over Prosecutorial Record and Campaign Funding
Why It Matters
The South Carolina Attorney General’s race is shaping up as one of the most consequential statewide contests of the 2026 election cycle. The office holds broad authority over lawsuits, legal settlements, and criminal prosecution policy — making the backgrounds and funding sources of its candidates a matter of direct public interest for South Carolina taxpayers and businesses.
Career prosecutor and Republican candidate David Stumbo has published a pointed op-ed drawing clear distinctions between himself and his opponents, raising questions about party authenticity, prosecutorial credentials, and the influence of out-of-state trial lawyer money in the race.
What Happened
Stumbo, who serves as a solicitor and lifelong Republican, published a column on April 24, 2026, making the case that the other major candidates in the South Carolina Attorney General’s race are misrepresenting their records to voters.
Stumbo identified two rivals by name. He described candidate David Pascoe as a Democrat-turned-Republican, noting that Pascoe had endorsed a candidate who, according to Stumbo, marched to defund police, opposed ICE enforcement, and “voted to transition children.” Stumbo also noted that Pascoe shared a campaign stage with Hillary Clinton in 2016 and appeared on the same ticket as Kamala Harris against President Donald Trump in the last election. Pascoe reportedly called former President Joe Biden a “role model.”
Stumbo’s second target was State Senator Stephen Goldfinch, whom he characterized as a politician presenting himself as a prosecutor. Stumbo acknowledged Goldfinch’s service in the State Senate and the National Guard, but asserted that Goldfinch “has never prosecuted a single criminal case under South Carolina law.”
By contrast, Stumbo described himself as a career prosecutor whose work has focused on fighting violent crime, securing convictions, and standing with victims and law enforcement rather than climbing the political ladder.
By the Numbers
15 — The number of maximum contributions Senator Goldfinch has received from the South Carolina trial lawyer association PAC and affiliated PACs, according to Stumbo’s column.
25–19 — The vote by which a legislative amendment Stumbo labeled the “Goldfinch amendment” failed during a recent tort reform debate. FITSNews previously described the amendment as “a Trojan horse that would have allowed juries to assign fault to non-parties while shielding certain defendants.”
35 years — The plea sentence Stumbo said Pascoe allowed for a mother convicted of suffocating her two young children, with the individual set to be released in 19 years.
3 elections — Stumbo stated he voted for President Trump in 2016, 2020, and 2024, emphasizing his alignment with the America First agenda of law and order, secure borders, and constitutional rights.
Life without parole — The sentence Stumbo’s office secured in a capital murder case, which he also used to pursue conviction of a child abuser connected to the case.
Follow the Money
Stumbo’s column placed heavy emphasis on campaign finance, arguing that the sources of a candidate’s funding reveal who will have influence over the AG’s office after the election. He pointed to what critics have called the “Shady Eight” — a network of nationally connected trial law firms alleged to have collected large taxpayer-funded contingency fees while channeling money into liberal political campaigns.
Stumbo specifically noted that prominent trial attorney John Morgan hosted a fundraiser for Pascoe, questioning why out-of-state liberal legal interests are investing heavily in a South Carolina law enforcement race. As South Carolina’s gubernatorial race also heats up heading into 2026, campaign finance scrutiny across statewide contests is increasing.
On the spending side, Stumbo defended his own record of fiscal restraint, noting that he used his personal vehicle for official work rather than billing taxpayers for a government-owned SUV. He framed the decision as consistent with a broader philosophy of doing “more with less than any other solicitor in the state.”
Zoom Out
South Carolina’s Attorney General race reflects a national trend of competitive primaries in which candidate credibility on law enforcement and financial independence from special interests have become central issues. Across the country, trial lawyer political spending has drawn scrutiny in states from Louisiana to Florida, where AG offices control decisions over major litigation and settlements affecting taxpayers.
The state’s broader political environment remains active, with South Carolina governor candidates recently addressing a gaming referendum and other high-stakes policy questions ahead of November.
What’s Next
With quarterly campaign filings now public, voters and political observers will continue to analyze the financial backing of each candidate in the South Carolina Attorney General’s race. Primary elections will determine which candidates advance, and Stumbo’s public challenge to his opponents’ records is likely to intensify as the campaign season progresses. Debates, additional campaign finance disclosures, and further candidate statements are expected in the weeks ahead.