For the time being at least, Charles D. “Pug” Ravenel is at the end of his political road. He came to the ultimate road block Monday when the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a lower court decision that found him ineligible to serve as governor because he does not meet resi dency requirements for the of fice as spelled out in the State Constitution. The final wos from the na tion's highest court, like the oth er unfavorable court decisions since he scored a stunning vic tory in the Democratic Primary run-off, was surely a disappoint ment to Ravenel and his sup porters. Though Ravenel is no longer a contender for governor, he is not entirely out of the race. he degree to which he supports the candidacy of W. J. Bryan Dorn— the man he defeated in the pri mary run-off and the candidate selected by the Democratic Par ty to replace him on the ticket when he was ruled ineligible— can significantly affect the out come of the race. In Florence yesterday, Rav enel's continued lukewarm en dorsement of Dorn was appar ent. He said he would vote for Dorn, but would do so by writ ing in his name. ‘He said others who wanted to show the strength of the movement that produced a victory for him in the Demo cratic run-off could do likewise. Ravenel’s dilema, as he has stated it, is that he cannot enthusiastically endorse Dorn because that would be endors ing a system of politics he op posed during the campaign. Whether this will ultimately be damaging to Ravenel's future political aspirations remains to be seen. The custom is for pri mary losers to publicly support the winners with at least surface enthusiasm. Ravenel apparently has de cided to break with custom even though it may alienate segments of political support that could be useful in the future. Ravenel has said he intends to be a can didate for political office again, but he hasn't said which office. The Ravenel constituency is obviously a force to be reckon ed with in state politics.To a large segment of voters he sym bolizes change in government. He ran as a reform candidate, advocating ethics legislation, ‘home rule” for counties and municipalities and other meas ures that the state’s political “old guard” has resisted. Indirectly, and sometimes not so indirectly, he attacked the political clique that has jealous ly held power in the state and wielded it, at times in self-serv ing ways. Even though his drive for the governorship has been thwarted, his candidacy has sent a message that can hardly be misread. Those who are elect ed in November will be obliged to consider warmly the impli cations of disregarding that mes sage. As for Ravenel, he is still a young man at 36. He has prov en himself to be an appealing and able candidate. There will be ample opportunity for him to seek public office with the obstacle of eligibility.Out of the way in the future, I, isn’t likely South Carolin ians have heard the last of him. Law Revised In an editorial last Thursday, we suggested some Republicans may be chuckling over the pos sibility for an election challenge because of a clause in state elec tion laws which bars candidates defeated in a primary from be ing placed on the general elec tion ballot. It turns out that clause was invalidated by a federal court in 1973 (Toporek v.S. C. State Elections Commission) and that it was deleted when the General Assembly revised election laws during the last legislative ses sion. The governor signed the revised act on Aug. 12. Howev er, it wasn’t until last Thursday, Oct. 17, that the state attorney general's office was notified of Justice Department approval of the legislation. The federal Vot ing Rights Act requires that any changes in election laws in South Carolina and certain other states be approved by the Justice De partment. So what loomed as a possi ble legal snare that could have been a basis for challenging Democratic gubernatorial nom inee W. J. Bryan Dorn, who was defeated in the primary run-off by Charles D. Ravenel, is no more.