North Carolina: House Candidate Charles Taylor Sues Political Group Over Gambling Mailer
- Charles M.
- Taylor, a Republican and longtime member of the Sanford City Council, does own the building at the center of the fight.
- The libel complaint was filed electronically in Lee County Superior Court on October 27, 2026, against the Sandhills Citizens Alliance (case 26CV001890-520).
Charles M. Taylor heads into Tuesday’s election for North Carolina House District 51 having sued the group behind a mailer that told voters he “owns an illegal gambling operation” and is “running a casino.”
Taylor, a Republican and longtime member of the Sanford City Council, does own the building at the center of the fight. What he denies is owning the business inside it. Three days after he filed his lawsuit, the state’s Alcohol Law Enforcement agency confirmed it had received a complaint about the video gambling business operating there.
The libel complaint was filed electronically in Lee County Superior Court on October 27, 2026, against the Sandhills Citizens Alliance (case 26CV001890-520). It seeks compensatory damages of more than $25,000, punitive damages and a jury trial.
Three lines on a mailer
The alliance registered with the State Board of Elections as an independent-expenditure political committee around September 21, 2026, according to the complaint. Its mailer, which carries the line “Paid for by Sandhills Citizens Alliance. Not authorized by a candidate,” went to voters in a district that covers all of Lee County and part of Moore County.
The complaint reproduces both sides of it. Here is what the mailer said, and how Taylor answers each line:
| The mailer said | Taylor’s complaint says |
|---|---|
| “CHARLES TAYLOR OWNS AN ILLEGAL GAMBLING OPERATION,” and he is “breaking the law himself” | He bought the building at 2101 Tramway Road in Sanford around December 31, 2025, with a tenant already operating there. He owns the property, not the tenant’s business or equipment, and does not manage or run it. |
| “HE’S ALSO RUNNING A CASINO” | Same answer: he is the landlord, not the operator. |
| “And now, Taylor is under a state ethics investigation” | A private citizen asked the State Ethics Commission to investigate around October 9. On October 15, commission officials told his lawyer that the agency lacked jurisdiction to investigate him in that capacity and that no inquiry, investigation or formal proceeding had been opened. |
Before suing, Taylor’s lawyer sent the group a cease-and-desist letter on October 21 asking for a retraction by October 23. The complaint says the alliance did not retract or correct the accusations by the October 23 deadline.
The filing accuses the alliance of publishing the claims knowing they were false or with reckless disregard for the truth. These are allegations in Taylor’s complaint, not judicial findings.
“The landlord” on the website, “the operator” in the mail
Much of Taylor’s case rests on the group’s own words. According to the complaint, the mailer cited an October 11 report by The Assembly and an October 12 report by The Rant.
The Assembly identified Taylor as the owner of the property, not the operator of the business. The Rant described a citizen’s ethics complaint, not an investigation opened by the commission.
The complaint also attaches pages from the alliance’s own website, captured on October 21. There, the group called Taylor “the landlord” and said he “faces a state ethics complaint.” The mailer went further on both counts.
Taylor had amended his ethics disclosure before filing the lawsuit. The Assembly reported that the property was initially omitted; Taylor’s complaint says he updated his filing after communicating with commission staff.
The alliance: a landlord can’t look away
The group is not backing down. In an October 28 statement, it called the lawsuit “meritless” and an attempt to silence questions a week before Election Day.
Its argument is that being a landlord is no defense. The state law that bans illegal video gaming machines also makes it a crime to “allow” them to be operated, the alliance said, adding: “The law doesn’t let a landlord bury his head in the sand.”
The group’s attorney, Paul Cox, said the alliance drew on “reputable news articles” and that “this sort of speech about a politician on the ballot deserves the highest level of protection under the First Amendment.” The alliance said it will defend the case.
Then came the ALE complaint
On October 30, ALE spokesperson Ashley Thornton told The Assembly that the agency had received a complaint about 2101 Tramway Road. She said the complaint, which focused on the video gambling business, had been sent to the agency’s Lee County office so an agent could investigate. She did not say who filed it.
That inquiry concerns the business at the address, and it is separate from the ethics complaint at the heart of the lawsuit. Philip R. Thomas, Taylor’s attorney, told The Assembly that ALE had not informed his client about it. Taylor told The Rant he had “heard nothing from ALE regarding any of my rental properties.”
What is inside the building? When The Assembly visited on October 9, it counted 22 video lottery machines that appeared to be luck-based slot games. Customers deposited cash and told staff when they were ready to cash out, the outlet said.
In an October 27 news release from Taylor’s lawyers, Sheriff Brian Estes said he had not received complaints about illegal activity or referred the matter to ALE, The Assembly reported.
Where the law draws the line for landlords
G.S. 14-306.1A prohibits operating or allowing the operation of video gaming machines covered by its statutory definition, subject to an exemption for qualifying tribal gaming.
Separately, North Carolina’s nuisance law covers the ownership or leasing of a building used for gambling. For gambling nuisances, the definition of knowledge turns on whether a person “knew or by the exercise of due diligence should have known” of the conduct.
Elsewhere in the state, police have acted against video gambling businesses, including a Raleigh sweepstakes parlor raid that led to charges against five people.
For now, none of the filings or reports reviewed show that an agency or court has found the machines at Tramway Road to be illegal, or that Taylor knew of any illegal activity. Taylor faces unaffiliated candidate April Montgomery on Tuesday.