The South Carolina Supreme Court granted extraordinary relief to Friends of Coastal South Carolina, reinstating a stay on a coastal development project that would authorize construction of 27 homes and the filling of 1.94 acres of wetlands.
The court issued a memorandum opinion on Dec. 18, 2025, in *Friends of Coastal South Carolina v. South Carolina Department of Environmental Services and Pulte Home Company, LLC*, vacating an Administrative Law Court order that had lifted an automatic stay on the project.
The case centers on permits issued by the South Carolina Department of Environmental Services to Pulte Home Company for construction activities on approximately 63.23 acres of coastal property. DES issued Pulte a Coastal Zone Consistency Certification in June 2024 and later granted coverage under the Construction General Permit on Dec. 18, 2024.
The permits authorize construction of 27 homes and associated infrastructure, including activities that would fill 1.94 acres of wetlands. Under South Carolina's coastal zone management laws, such projects require certification that proposed activities are consistent with the state's coastal zone management program.
Friends of Coastal South Carolina, represented by attorneys from the S.C. Environmental Law Project, filed a contested case challenging the permits on Jan. 17, 2025. Under section 1-23-600(H)(2) of the South Carolina Code, filing the contested case automatically triggered a stay of the DES permits, halting construction activities while the challenge proceeds.
Pulte subsequently moved to lift the automatic stay, arguing before the Administrative Law Court that the project should proceed while the environmental challenge remains pending. The ALC granted Pulte's motion, removing the stay and clearing the way for construction to begin.
The environmental group then petitioned the Supreme Court to exercise its original jurisdiction and reinstate the stay. In environmental and administrative law cases, parties can sometimes bypass intermediate appeals and petition the state's highest court directly for extraordinary relief when immediate action is necessary to prevent irreparable harm.
The Supreme Court granted the petition without requiring full briefing from the parties, indicating the justices found sufficient grounds to act immediately. The court's brief memorandum opinion reinstated the stay, meaning construction activities must cease until the underlying contested case is resolved before the Administrative Law Court.
"We grant the petition for extraordinary relief, vacate the ALC order lifting the stay, dispense with briefing, and stay the effect of the DES order pending the resolution of the underlying contested case before the ALC," the court wrote.
The decision was unanimous, with Chief Justice John W. Kittredge and Justices Few, James, Hill and Verdin all concurring in the relief granted.
The court's memorandum opinion carries a notice that it "has no precedential value" and "should not be cited or relied on as precedent in any proceeding" except as provided by state court rules. This designation is typical for administrative orders and brief procedural rulings that don't establish broader legal principles.
The case highlights ongoing tensions between coastal development pressures and environmental protection in South Carolina. The state's coastal areas face increasing development pressure as population growth continues, while environmental advocates work to protect wetlands that provide critical habitat and flood protection.
Wetlands serve as natural buffers against storm surge and flooding while supporting diverse ecosystems. Federal and state laws typically require permits for activities that would fill or alter wetlands, with regulators weighing development benefits against environmental impacts.
Friends of Coastal South Carolina, the petitioning organization, focuses on environmental advocacy in the state's coastal regions. The group challenges development projects it believes threaten coastal ecosystems and works to enforce environmental protection laws.
Pulte Home Company is a major residential construction company that builds homes and communities across multiple states. The company's projects often involve large-scale residential developments that require extensive permitting and environmental review.
The contested case will now proceed before the Administrative Law Court, where Friends of Coastal South Carolina can challenge the environmental permits on substantive grounds. The group may argue that DES failed to properly evaluate environmental impacts or that the project violates coastal zone management requirements.
Pulte and DES will have opportunities to defend the permit decisions and argue that the project complies with applicable environmental laws. The Administrative Law Court will ultimately determine whether the permits were properly issued.
The Supreme Court's intervention ensures that no irreversible construction activities occur while the environmental challenge remains pending. If the Administrative Law Court ultimately sides with the environmental group, construction activities that proceeded during the challenge could create additional legal complications.
The case reflects broader legal frameworks governing coastal development in South Carolina, where multiple layers of federal and state environmental review apply to projects near sensitive coastal resources. The outcome could influence how similar challenges proceed in the state's growing coastal development market.