New Court Filing Blasts Nancy Mace

Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

by JENN WOOD

***

In the latest twist in a legal saga involving U.S. congresswoman Nancy Mace, her ex-fiancé Patrick Bryant and a series of explosive sexual abuse allegations, attorneys for GLT2, LLC — a company owned by Bryant — filed a scathing brief this week aimed at stopping Mace and one of her key allies, a woman identified in court filings as Jane Doe, from intervening in a now-withdrawn pre-suit discovery petition.

As FITSNews previously reported, Bryant — a Charleston-based entrepreneur and former fiancé of Mace — is at the center of a widening civil litigation scandal. The legal chaos began in February 2025, when Mace delivered her famous “scorched earth” speech from the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives. In that speech, she accused Bryant and his business associates of committing “depraved” acts of sexual abuse – claiming she had uncovered video evidence implicating them in the assaults of multiple women.

Mace positioned herself as the “key witness” in forthcoming cases — a move that set off a cascade of lawsuits, media scrutiny, and counter-allegations.

This latest filing represents a forceful rebuttal from Bryant’s legal team — and a strategic attempt to reframe the narrative.

***

RELATED | LAWSUIT AGAINST NANCY MACE’S EX-FIANCE NOW ALLEGES RETALIATION, LEGAL ABUSE

***

GLT2 WITHDRAWS PETITION, BUT HITS BACK HARD

Attorneys for GLT2 argued that their discovery petition — originally filed to depose political strategist Wesley Donehue (.pdf) about Mace’s credibility and alleged behind-the-scenes conduct — is now moot, as they have voluntarily withdrawn the request. But they didn’t stop there.

In a 28-page memorandum (.pdf), GLT2 blasted both Mace and Doe, accusing them of coming to court with “unclean hands” and advancing legally and factually flawed arguments.

“Mace is attempting to use her alleged Congressional Immunity as both a sword and a shield,” the filing stated, accusing the congresswoman of leveraging her platform to “delegitimize public officials and institutions” while simultaneously shielding herself from accountability.

***

Jane Doe — who filed a civil suit in May naming both Bryant and GLT2 — was portrayed as deeply conflicted in her reliance on Mace. The memorandum cited an affidavit from a former colleague allegedly recounting that Doe privately questioned Mace’s credibility, telling her lawyer “Nancy’s making all this up” and that it was “literally a lie” designed to further Mace’s political ambitions.

GLT2 — described by its attorney (.pdf) as one of several business entities owned or controlled by Bryant — has been named as a co-defendant in Doe’s civil suit. According to court filings, the company operates within a broader network of limited liability companies in which Bryant holds ownership stakes — some of which, lawyers say, have been impacted financially and reputationally by Mace’s allegations.

***

RELATED | JANE DOE LAWSUIT TARGETS NANCY MACE’S EX-FIANCÉ

***

THE CENTRAL ARGUMENT: MACE’S PUBLIC ROLE MAKES HER FAIR GAME

Bryant’s legal team contends that Mace, by publicly declaring herself the central witness in multiple sexual assault claims — including in her congressional speech, media interviews and social media posts — effectively put her credibility at issue.

“She has no real expectation of privacy,” the brief argued, asserting that Mace’s own words made her a necessary subject of pre-suit investigation.

Attorneys for GLT2 also emphasized the discovery effort focused not on suing Mace, but on vetting claims tied to the Jane Does — women Mace herself said were coming forward based on videos she claimed to have found.

The withdrawn petition sought to preserve testimony from Donehue, who allegedly had inside knowledge of Mace’s conduct and motivations. Bryant’s attorneys argued that Donehue’s deposition raised significant questions about Mace’s truthfulness — questions now likely to surface in Doe’s active civil suit.

The memorandum stated the deposition was conducted in good faith and was intended to be used as a sworn affidavit unless a court later authorized its use under formal discovery rules. Attorneys also denied leaking the transcript of Donehue’s deposition to the media.

***

RELATED | BOMBSHELL DEPOSITION: NANCY MACE’S FORMER STRATEGIST UNLOADS

***

LEGAL SHOTS FIRED OVER SANCTIONS REQUEST

Both Mace and Jane Doe have sought sanctions against Bryant’s team, claiming the petition was abusive and designed to smear them. GLT2’s opposition brief called these claims “dubious and disingenuous,” saying any reputational harm was self-inflicted through Mace’s high-profile public campaign.

The filing also pointed to what it framed as hypocrisy — suggesting Mace cannot simultaneously claim immunity from civil liability under the Speech and Debate Clause and Westfall Act while also arguing she is a directly impacted party entitled to intervene in the petition.

This development underscores the complexity — and volatility — of the legal drama unfolding around Mace and Bryant. On one side is a sitting member of Congress who claims to have uncovered horrifying crimes and vows to see justice done. On the other, a former fiancé fighting to defend his name in court and in the media.

If additional civil suits emerge from the “dozens” of alleged victims Mace referenced in February, this battle over witness credibility and legal maneuvering could be just the beginning.

FITSNews will continue to track developments in this case — including motions, rulings, and fallout from the dueling claims.

Stay tuned…

***

THE MEMORANDUM…

(S.C. Ninth Circuit)

***

ABOUT THE AUTHOR …

As a private investigator turned journalist, Jenn Wood brings a unique skill set to FITSNews as its research director. Known for her meticulous sourcing and victim-centered approach, she helps shape the newsroom’s most complex investigative stories while producing the FITSFiles and Cheer Incorporated podcasts. Jenn lives in South Carolina with her family, where her work continues to spotlight truth, accountability, and justice.

***

WANNA SOUND OFF?

Got something you’d like to say in response to one of our articles? Or an issue you’d like to address proactively? We have an open microphone policy! Submit your letter to the editor (or guest column) via email HERE. Got a tip for a story? CLICK HERE. Got a technical question or a glitch to report? CLICK HERE.