South Carolina Bill Book

The bill would stop most people in South Carolina from suing gun dealers, manufacturers, or sellers for injuries caused by their products.

Citizens could lose the ability to hold gun sellers accountable when a weapon is unsafe or used wrongly, while the industry keeps its protections and profits. The bill limits lawsuits except in narrow cases, so victims may have fewer ways to get compensation.

Firearms industry

• Accountability (hurts) — Reduces ability to sue gun sellers. Limits civil actions against dealers, manufacturers, and sellers
• Rights & Protections (hurts) — Cuts right to sue. Blocks most lawsuits unless narrow exceptions apply
• Who Bears the Cost (hurts) — Costs shift to victims. Victims may have to pay medical bills without recourse
• Process Transparency (neutral) — No new public oversight. Bill does not add reporting or oversight mechanisms
• Funding Tilt (neutral) — No funding changes. Bill contains no new spending or tax provisions

• Official text (SC H4723)https://www.scstatehouse.gov/billsearch.php?billnumbers=4723&session=126&summary=B
• LegiScan — H4723https://legiscan.com/SC/bill/H4723/2025

Drivers will have to pay a small filing fee and may face higher arbitration costs when suing insurers over car damage.

Consumers should watch this bill because it could make suing for car damage more expensive and push more cases into a private arbitration system that favors insurers.

Insurers

• Accountability (hurts) — Arbitration limits court oversight. Arbitrator decisions become evidence, reducing court review
• Rights & Protections (hurts) — Limits right to sue. Pushes disputes to arbitration, adds fees
• Who Bears the Cost (hurts) — Costs shift to claimants. Filing fee and service fees paid by claimant
• Process Transparency (hurts) — Arbitration less open. Arbitrators selected by rotation, not public
• Funding Tilt (hurts) — Fees favor industry. Arbitrator compensation paid from court funds, not parties

• Official text (SC H4732)https://www.scstatehouse.gov/billsearch.php?billnumbers=4732&session=126&summary=B
• LegiScan — H4732https://legiscan.com/SC/bill/H4732/2025

The bill would let parents control all health decisions for kids and let them sue providers who treat a child without their permission.

Parents will gain more power over their children's health, but minors could lose access to care they need quickly, and doctors may face costly lawsuits that could raise prices for everyone.

Everyday People

• Accountability (helps) — Adds parental lawsuits for violations. Providers can be held liable for skipping parental consent
• Rights & Protections (hurts) — Limits minors' ability to consent. Reduces autonomy for youths 16 and older
• Who Bears the Cost (hurts) — Potential litigation costs for providers. May increase health‑care costs for patients
• Process Transparency (neutral) — No new transparency measures. Bill does not change how decisions are disclosed
• Funding Tilt (neutral) — No funding changes. No new money allocated or taken

• Official text (SC H3638)https://www.scstatehouse.gov/billsearch.php?billnumbers=3638&session=126&summary=B
• LegiScan — H3638https://legiscan.com/SC/bill/H3638/2025

Parents would have to give permission for any medical treatment their children receive, limiting teens' ability to get care on their own.

The bill would shift health decisions from teens to parents, cutting teens' access to confidential care and making it harder for them to get needed services without a parent’s OK.

Everyday People

• Accountability (neutral) — neutral. Parents gain a new right to sue, but minors lose their own ability to sue for health decisions.
• Rights & Protections (hurts) — negative. Reduces minors' right to consent to their own health care, limiting their autonomy.
• Who Bears the Cost (neutral) — neutral. No clear shift of financial burden is created by the bill.
• Process Transparency (neutral) — neutral. The bill adds a claim process but does not change overall transparency of health decisions.
• Funding Tilt (neutral) — neutral. No new funding or budget changes are included.

• Official text (SC S0242)https://www.scstatehouse.gov/billsearch.php?billnumbers=0242&session=126&summary=B
• LegiScan — S0242https://legiscan.com/SC/bill/S0242/2025

Families who pull their kids out of public schools could claim a refundable $3,000 tax credit per child.

Supporters say it helps parents choose the best learning for their kids, but critics warn it takes money away from public schools and helps wealthier families afford private options.

Private schools

• Accountability (neutral) — . Bill adds credit but does not change oversight of schools.
• Rights & Protections (hurts) — . Provides a benefit only to those who leave public schools, reducing equal support.
• Who Bears the Cost (hurts) — . Tax credit reduces state revenue, shifting cost to all taxpayers.
• Process Transparency (neutral) — . Credit claimed via standard tax form; no new secret process.
• Funding Tilt (hurts) — . Directs public money toward private or home schooling instead of public schools.

• Official text (SC S0108)https://www.scstatehouse.gov/billsearch.php?billnumbers=0108&session=126&summary=B
• LegiScan — S0108https://legiscan.com/SC/bill/S0108/2025

This bill would help data centers set up more easily, but could shift costs to regular people.

If this bill passes, it might make it easier for big data centers to open, but it could also mean higher costs for everyone else. It's important to speak up now to make sure our needs are considered.

Big Business

• Accountability (hurts) — Less strict enforcement for two years.. The bill prioritizes guidance over enforcement, which may reduce accountability.
• Rights & Protections (hurts) — Potential cost shifts to consumers.. The bill could lead to higher utility costs for regular people.
• Who Bears the Cost (hurts) — Costs may be passed to everyday people.. Data centers may benefit from lower costs while consumers pay more.

Pushing for it: Data centers
Bearing the cost: Consumers

• Official text (SC S0867)https://www.scstatehouse.gov/billsearch.php?billnumbers=0867&session=126&summary=B
• LegiScan — S0867https://legiscan.com/SC/bill/S0867/2025

The bill would require data centers to get a state certificate and meet water, noise, and environmental rules before they can operate.

If passed, the state will watch over data center projects, protect water and neighborhoods, and decide who pays for extra power, but it could add costs for utilities and possibly raise rates for everyday customers.

Data centers

• Accountability (helps) — Adds oversight by state commission. Certification process creates accountability for data center operators
• Rights & Protections (helps) — Environmental and noise protections. Sets water efficiency, noise, vibration, and light standards
• Who Bears the Cost (hurts) — Costs may shift to utilities or consumers. Cost allocation methodology could raise utility rates
• Process Transparency (helps) — Public hearings and records required. Certification proceedings must be recorded and made public
• Funding Tilt (neutral) — No specific funding changes noted. Bill does not create new funding sources

• Official text (SC S0902)https://www.scstatehouse.gov/billsearch.php?billnumbers=0902&session=126&summary=B
• LegiScan — S0902https://legiscan.com/SC/bill/S0902/2025

Owners of boats 16 feet or longer must carry at least $50,000 liability insurance, or face fines and possible jail.

The bill would protect people on the water by making sure boat owners can pay damages, but it also adds a new cost for boat owners and could punish them harshly if they forget to keep insurance.

Everyday People

• Accountability (helps) — Holds boat owners responsible for coverage. Owners must prove insurance, creating accountability for damages.
• Rights & Protections (helps) — Protects third‑party victims. Ensures victims can be compensated if a boat causes injury or property loss.
• Who Bears the Cost (hurts) — Shifts cost to boat owners. Owners must pay for insurance they previously may not have needed.
• Process Transparency (neutral) — Limited reporting requirements. Insurers are not required to report lapses, reducing transparency.
• Funding Tilt (helps) — Fines fund safety program. Collected fines are used for boater training and safety.

• Official text (SC H3729)https://www.scstatehouse.gov/billsearch.php?billnumbers=3729&session=126&summary=B
• LegiScan — H3729https://legiscan.com/SC/bill/H3729/2025

This bill would organize rules about how money is spent on education in South Carolina, which might help schools get the funding they need.

If this bill passes, it could make it easier for schools to understand how to use their money. This is important because schools need clear rules to help students learn better. Now is the time to pay attention to this bill.

• Accountability (neutral) — Organizes existing funding rules.. The bill codifies existing provisions, which may improve accountability.
• Rights & Protections (neutral) — No direct impact on rights.. The bill does not directly affect individual rights.
• Who Bears the Cost (neutral) — Funding sources remain unclear.. It is unknown how this bill will affect funding sources.
• Process Transparency (neutral) — May improve transparency in funding.. Organizing rules could lead to better transparency in how funds are allocated.
• Funding Tilt (neutral) — No significant funding changes noted.. The bill does not propose new funding, just organizes existing rules.

• Official text (SC H3843)https://www.scstatehouse.gov/billsearch.php?billnumbers=3843&session=126&summary=B
• LegiScan — H3843https://legiscan.com/SC/bill/H3843/2025

Owners of boats bigger than 70 horsepower in South Carolina would have to carry at least $50,000 liability insurance or face fines and possible jail.

The bill makes boat owners pay for insurance, protecting others from unpaid damages, but adds a new cost and penalty, so voters should weigh safety versus expense now.

Everyday People

• Accountability (helps) — adds misdemeanor penalties. creates a criminal charge for operating an uninsured boat
• Rights & Protections (helps) — protects victims. ensures injured parties can collect from insurance
• Who Bears the Cost (hurts) — cost shifted to boat owners. owners must purchase liability insurance
• Process Transparency (neutral) — neutral on transparency. requires proof of insurance but does not force insurers to report lapses
• Funding Tilt (helps) — fines fund safety program. collected fines are used for boater training and safety

• Official text (SC S0026)https://www.scstatehouse.gov/billsearch.php?billnumbers=0026&session=126&summary=B
• LegiScan — S0026https://legiscan.com/SC/bill/S0026/2025

This bill would give renters new ways to deal with mold in their homes, making landlords fix it or let tenants move safely.

This bill is a big step for renters in South Carolina. It would make landlords responsible for keeping homes free of mold and give renters clear steps to take if mold appears and makes them sick. For a long time, renters have struggled with mold issues that can cause health problems, and it has been hard to get landlords to fix them. This bill would set clear rules, like making landlords tell you about mold before you move in and pay for cleanup if it's not your fault. Some landlords might say these new rules cost too much money or are hard to follow. But supporters would say it makes sure everyone has a safe and healthy place to live. If this bill passes, renters would have more power to demand safe living conditions.

Everyday People

• Accountability (helps) — Landlords would be more accountable for mold issues.. The bill would make landlords responsible for preventing mold and fixing it if it affects a tenant's health or safety.
• Rights & Protections (helps) — Tenants would gain new protections against mold.. Tenants would get remedies for mold, landlords would have to disclose mold, and landlords would need to maintain properties to prevent mold.
• Who Bears the Cost (helps) — Landlords would generally bear the cost of mold remediation.. The landlord would pay all costs of mold remediation unless the mold is a result of the tenant's actions.
• Process Transparency (neutral) — No direct impact on process transparency.. The bill focuses on landlord and tenant obligations and remedies, not legislative process transparency.
• Funding Tilt (neutral) — No specific funding mentioned.. The bill does not include new government funding or appropriations.

Pushing for it: Renters, by providing safer housing and clear remedies.
Bearing the cost: Landlords, due to new maintenance obligations and potential remediation costs.

• Official text (SC H3232)https://www.scstatehouse.gov/billsearch.php?billnumbers=3232&session=126&summary=B
• LegiScan — H3232https://legiscan.com/SC/bill/H3232/2025

This bill would give money back to small businesses in South Carolina if they pay their workers a fair, living wage, helping workers earn more.

This bill is good for regular people because it would help them earn more money. It would give a special tax break to small businesses that choose to pay their workers a 'livable wage,' which is enough money to cover basic needs. This means more money in workers' pockets without making it a rule that businesses must pay more. Businesses would get help for up to four years to adjust to paying higher wages. Some might say this costs the state money that could be used elsewhere, but supporters believe it helps workers and the economy, making people less reliant on public help. Since this bill is just starting, now is the time to tell your lawmakers if you think helping businesses pay better wages is a good idea for South Carolina.

Workers

• Accountability (helps) — Businesses must meet conditions to get the tax credit.. Qualified employers must pay livable wages, maintain headcount, and submit payroll verification to receive the credit. The state would publish reports on participation.
• Rights & Protections (helps) — Encourages businesses to pay workers a living wage.. The bill aims to help nonexempt employees earn a livable wage, which would improve their financial stability and reduce reliance on public assistance.
• Who Bears the Cost (hurts) — State tax revenue would fund the credit.. The tax credit would reduce the amount of income or payroll taxes collected by the state, shifting the cost of encouraging higher wages to state taxpayers.
• Process Transparency (neutral) — The state would report on the program, but not individual business data.. The Department of Revenue would publish an annual summary report on the number of participating employers, employees paid livable wages, and total credits claimed. Individual employer data would not be public.
• Funding Tilt (helps) — Tilts state funding to support higher wages for workers.. The tax credit would use state funds to incentivize small businesses to pay their employees at or above a livable wage, effectively directing resources to support worker income.

Pushing for it: Small businesses and their employees
Bearing the cost: South Carolina state tax revenue

• Official text (SC H4603)https://www.scstatehouse.gov/billsearch.php?billnumbers=4603&session=126&summary=B
• LegiScan — H4603https://legiscan.com/SC/bill/H4603/2025

This bill would make schools ask parents before using AI with kids and keep student information safe, so parents stay in charge.

This bill would give parents more control over how schools use new computer brains, called AI, with their children. It would make sure teachers are still in charge of lessons and grades, and that student information is kept private. Without this bill, schools might use AI tools that collect a lot of student facts or even make big choices about kids without parents knowing or agreeing. Some people might say these rules make it harder for schools to use new technology to help kids learn. But this bill tries to find a good balance between using new tech and keeping kids safe and parents in charge.

Everyday People

• Accountability (helps) — Stronger oversight. School entities and vendors would face penalties for violations, and parents could seek relief in court.
• Rights & Protections (helps) — Boosts student and parent rights. Requires opt-in parental consent for AI use, protects student data, and ensures human oversight.
• Who Bears the Cost (neutral) — Compliance costs for schools. Schools would need to develop policies and ensure compliance, which may incur administrative costs. Non-compliance could affect state funding.
• Process Transparency (helps) — Increases transparency. Schools would have to publicly identify AI tools and provide annual disclosures to parents.
• Funding Tilt (neutral) — Condition for state funds. Compliance would be a condition for participating in state-funded education programs, not a direct funding shift.

Pushing for it: Students and parents
Bearing the cost: Schools or AI vendors

• Official text (SC H5253)https://www.scstatehouse.gov/billsearch.php?billnumbers=5253&session=126&summary=B
• LegiScan — H5253https://legiscan.com/SC/bill/H5253/2025

This bill would stop insurance companies from using credit scores to set car insurance prices, helping people pay fairer rates.

If this bill passes, many people could save money on their car insurance. Now is the time to support it and make sure everyone pays a fair price.

Everyday People

• Accountability (helps) — Improves fairness in insurance pricing. Stops unfair discrimination based on credit scores
• Rights & Protections (helps) — Protects consumers from unfair practices. Ensures fair treatment in insurance coverage
• Who Bears the Cost (helps) — Shifts costs to insurers. Insurers must find other ways to set rates
• Process Transparency (neutral) — No significant changes to transparency. Does not affect how insurers operate overall
• Funding Tilt (neutral) — No funding changes noted. Does not affect funding for insurance programs

• Official text (SC S0215)https://www.scstatehouse.gov/billsearch.php?billnumbers=0215&session=126&summary=B
• LegiScan — S0215https://legiscan.com/SC/bill/S0215/2025

This bill would give children more rights in court, help them get treatment instead of jail, and make the justice system fairer for young people.

This bill is a big step forward for children in South Carolina who get into trouble. It would make sure kids have a lawyer when police question them and stop the use of solitary confinement. Instead of sending kids to jail, the bill wants to help them with programs in their community for school, mental health, and other needs. It would also make it easier for kids to get their records cleared later on. Some people might worry about how this affects public safety, but the bill focuses on helping kids change for the better while still addressing serious crimes. This bill is still new, so now is the time to tell your lawmakers what you think about giving kids a better chance.

Everyday People

• Accountability (helps) — The bill requires more data reporting and structured decision-making, making the juvenile justice system more transparent and accountable for its actions.. Amends Section 63-19-340 to require specific statistics in annual reports. Requires the Department to develop and utilize structured decision-making tools for all key points of the juvenile justice process.
• Rights & Protections (helps) — Establishes a 'Children's Bill of Rights,' ensures legal counsel for young children, and bans solitary confinement.. Adds Article 2 to Chapter 19, Title 63, to establish the 'Children's Bill of Rights.' Adds Section 63-19-210 to require legal counsel for children 15 or younger prior to a custodial interrogation. Adds Section 63-19-365 to prohibit the use of solitary confinement on a child.
• Who Bears the Cost (helps) — Limits fees and restitution for children, shifting financial burdens away from families.. Adds Section 63-19-1050 to prohibit charging a fee to a child as a condition of diversion and limits restitution to $500. Prohibits the child from being ordered to pay for drug screens unless the child has insurance to cover the cost.
• Process Transparency (helps) — Requires better data collection and clear decision-making tools for juvenile justice processes.. Amends Section 63-19-340 to provide that the report must include specific statistics relating to children referred to the Department. Requires the Department to develop and utilize structured decision-making tools for all key points of the juvenile justice process.
• Funding Tilt (helps) — Creates a fund to redirect savings from detention to community programs, investing in rehabilitation.. Adds Section 63-19-520 to establish the Juvenile Justice Improvement Fund, allowing the Department of Juvenile Justice to divert moneys saved from decreased reliance on out-of-home placement to fund community intervention programs.

Pushing for it: Community intervention programs, children, and families
Bearing the cost: Department of Juvenile Justice (from reduced out-of-home placements)

• Official text (SC S0149)https://www.scstatehouse.gov/billsearch.php?billnumbers=0149&session=126&summary=B
• LegiScan — S0149https://legiscan.com/SC/bill/S0149/2025

Insurers in South Carolina could not cancel, limit, or raise premiums because of a person's genetic test results.

Consumers will keep their right to get life, health, disability, or long‑term care insurance without fear that a DNA test will make it more expensive or unavailable; insurers lose a tool they could use to charge higher rates.

Everyday People

• Accountability (helps) — Adds clear rules on insurer behavior. Insurers must get written consent before using genetic data.
• Rights & Protections (helps) — Strengthens consumer protections. Prevents denial or higher premiums based on DNA.
• Who Bears the Cost (neutral) — No new funding or cost shift. Bill does not create new fees or subsidies.
• Process Transparency (neutral) — Standard legislative process. Bill is still in committee stage.
• Funding Tilt (neutral) — No funding provisions. Bill does not allocate money.

• Official text (SC H3257)https://www.scstatehouse.gov/billsearch.php?billnumbers=3257&session=126&summary=B
• LegiScan — H3257https://legiscan.com/SC/bill/H3257/2025

The bill would make it illegal to refuse housing, services, school or jobs because of race, color or national origin, letting people sue if they face such bias.

If the act passes, you could sue anyone who blocks you from renting a house, buying a product, attending school, or getting a job because of your race or skin color. The state would have a tool to chase down unfair treatment. This is a good time to speak up before the bill closes committee.

Everyday People

• Accountability (helps) — Creates clear legal standards and enforcement for discrimination.. Adds civil remedies and the ability to sue for bias.
• Rights & Protections (helps) — Broadens protected classes and clarifies definitions.. Extends anti‑discrimination rules to housing, public places, schools and jobs.
• Who Bears the Cost (neutral) — No new funding or fees are created.. Costs are limited to normal court expenses.
• Process Transparency (neutral) — Bill does not change procedural rules.. No special reporting or oversight mechanisms added.
• Funding Tilt (neutral) — No funding provisions are included.. State does not allocate money for enforcement.

• Official text (SC H3160)https://www.scstatehouse.gov/billsearch.php?billnumbers=3160&session=126&summary=B
• LegiScan — H3160https://legiscan.com/SC/bill/H3160/2025

The bill would force insurers to be more open about prior‑authorization decisions, set faster timelines, and stop switching drugs, helping patients get needed care quicker.

The bill could make it easier for South Carolinians to get needed medicines without long waits or surprise drug changes, but insurers may push back, so advocates need to push now while it’s still just a proposal.

Everyday People

• Accountability (helps) — Increases insurer reporting and oversight. Requires filings on approval and denial rates
• Rights & Protections (helps) — Adds patient protections. Limits ongoing prior‑authorization for chronic patients and bans drug switches
• Who Bears the Cost (neutral) — Cost impact falls on insurers, not consumers. Insurers must pay for services once authorized
• Process Transparency (helps) — Mandates clear timelines and reporting. Sets timelines and requires transparent prior‑authorization process
• Funding Tilt (neutral) — No new funding or spending required. Bill does not allocate additional funds

• Official text (SC H4562)https://www.scstatehouse.gov/billsearch.php?billnumbers=4562&session=126&summary=B
• LegiScan — H4562https://legiscan.com/SC/bill/H4562/2025

The bill would force insurers to pay for scalp‑cooling devices and services, and require chemo centers to offer them to all eligible patients.

Passing this bill means cancer patients can keep their hair during chemo without paying extra, and clinics must have the cooling system for anyone who needs it, easing the emotional toll on families.

Everyday People

• Accountability (helps) — adds insurer and facility accountability. requires insurers to cover and notify, facilities must offer to receive payment
• Rights & Protections (helps) — expands patient coverage rights. mandates coverage for scalp cooling and requires notice
• Who Bears the Cost (helps) — cost stays with insurers, not patients. coverage subject to usual deductibles but no extra out‑of‑pocket
• Process Transparency (helps) — requires insurer notice. insurers must inform policyholders that scalp cooling is covered
• Funding Tilt (neutral) — no new funding. no additional state funds provided

• Official text (SC H4972)https://www.scstatehouse.gov/billsearch.php?billnumbers=4972&session=126&summary=B
• LegiScan — H4972https://legiscan.com/SC/bill/H4972/2025

The bill would let out‑of‑state optometrists work for free with uninsured patients, but they could not be paid and must be supervised.

Citizens could gain more free eye care for those who cannot afford it, while the state keeps oversight and protects volunteers from lawsuits; now is the time to support the bill before it stalls.

Everyday People

• Accountability (helps) — Volunteer oversight and regular case review. Adds supervision of volunteer optometrists by licensed optometrists.
• Rights & Protections (helps) — Liability immunity for volunteers. Includes volunteer optometrists in existing malpractice immunity provisions.
• Who Bears the Cost (neutral) — No new taxpayer funding required. Volunteer services are unpaid; no direct cost shift to consumers.
• Process Transparency (neutral) — Standard licensing process. Uses existing board procedures for issuing and renewing licenses.
• Funding Tilt (neutral) — No funding changes. Bill does not allocate or redirect money.

• Official text (SC S0393)https://www.scstatehouse.gov/billsearch.php?billnumbers=0393&session=126&summary=B
• LegiScan — S0393https://legiscan.com/SC/bill/S0393/2025