S0733 would add a new section to the South Carolina Code prohibiting state agencies, political subdivisions, school districts, and any other entity supported in whole or in part by public funds from using public money to host or provide drag story hours or other drag shows for minors under 18. It also bars those entities from hosting such events on their own premises or allowing private parties to use their premises for those events when minors are present.
The bill defines both “drag show” and “drag story hour” broadly, with drag story hour specifically described as drag performers reading children’s books in public spaces such as libraries, schools, and bookstores. If a covered institution violates the bill, the official responsible for disbursing public funds must stop funding the institution. The Attorney General would also be required to impose a civil fine of $500 per attendee at a violating event and issue a public reprimand of the institution and its chief executive officer. In addition, parents or legal guardians of minors could bring a private civil action seeking damages and injunctive or declaratory relief.
Impact
If enacted, the bill would create a new restriction on the use of public funds by state and local government entities and by publicly supported organizations, including school districts and institutions with commingled public and private funding. It would add enforcement mechanisms through funding cutoffs, civil penalties, public reprimands, and private lawsuits, and it would place these provisions in Title 6 of the South Carolina Code as a new Section 6-1-200. The bill would directly affect libraries, schools, bookstores, and other venues if they are publicly funded or publicly supported and host events involving minors.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee debate or votes in the provided materials, the measure appears to be framed as a child-protection and public-funding restriction bill rather than a general speech regulation. The caption and structure suggest support from sponsors concerned about drag performances involving minors and the use of public resources for such events. No contrary testimony, amendments, or vote history is provided here, so the overall sentiment cannot be assessed from recorded debate, but the bill’s language indicates a strongly restrictive posture toward drag-related programming for minors.
Contention
The main points of contention are likely to be whether the bill improperly targets expressive conduct and LGBTQ-related events, whether its definitions are broad enough to sweep in benign or educational programming, and whether the funding and penalty provisions are overly punitive. Opponents would likely focus on First Amendment, viewpoint-discrimination, and vagueness concerns, especially because the bill reaches events on premises used by public entities and by entities only partially supported by public funds. Supporters would likely argue that the bill is a permissible condition on public funding and a measure to protect minors from sexualized performances.