Latest news with #HouseBill1239
Yahoo
21-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Rhoden signs library-smut, bathroom-access bills
PIERRE, S.D. (KELO) — Gov. Larry Rhoden has signed into law three more acts passed by the Legislature, including new restrictions on who can legally be in bathrooms and a new route for people to ask that public libraries remove obscene materials. Longtime McCook County Sheriff dies The governor's office announced on Friday morning the signings of House Bill 1259 and House Bill 1239, as well as House Bill 1174 that revises certain provisions related to the rights and obligations of a father of a child born to an unmarried mother. Another 66 House and Senate bills remain on the Republican governor's desk awaiting action. So far, he has approved 154 and vetoed one, which the House of Representatives refused to override. The Legislature is scheduled to return to the Capitol on Monday, March 31, to consider any other vetoes. The South Dakota Library Association opposed the original version of HB 1239 regarding obscene materials. Sponsored by Republican Rep. Bethany Soye, the legislation sought to remove an existing exemption that protected from prosecution 'a bona fide school, college, university, museum, or public library, or was acting in the capacity of an employee of such an organization or a retail outlet affiliated with and serving the educational purposes of such an organization.' The House of Representatives voted 38-32 for Soye's version. Dozens of librarians and supporters clad in green shirts however rallied at the Capitol when the Senate took it up on March 10. That day, Republican Sen. David Wheeler significantly amended existing law, leaving in place the protection for librarians, while providing a new path for people to express opposition to materials. The new law, starting July 1, allows an individual to appeal to the local school board or public library board to determine whether any matter or material is obscene. Any determination made by the board as to whether any matter or material is obscene can then be appealed to court. Senators voted 18-16 for Wheeler's amendment and then passed the amended version 32-2. The House agreed to accept the Wheeler version 36-34, with Soye notably changing sides from yes to no. The governor's announcement on Friday included a statement from Rhoden. 'South Dakota is a place where commonsense values remain common, and these bills reinforce that fact,' the statement said. 'These bills promote strong families, safety in education, and freedom from the 'woke' agenda like what has happened in too many other places.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
14-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Which education bills received a passing or failing grade in the 2025 legislative session?
South Dakota's 100th legislative session proved to be a busy one for education. Of the more than 400 bills filed, a quarter of them touched on education in some capacity. From failed bills to make school board elections partisan or limit education lobbyists' funding, to attempts to defund an entire school district or use public money for private education, things got political. Rep. Phil Jensen, R-Rapid City, lost his vice-chair position on the House Education committee and shortly withdrew his bill to defund the Huron School District after public outcry. He initially brought the bill after Huron administrators opposed school choice bills and after he learned trans students were allowed to use the bathroom of their choice in Huron. Thursday marked the final regular day of the legislative session ahead of veto day set for March 31. That's when Gov. Larry Rhoden will have signed or vetoed several bills and the Legislature will come back to reconsider them. He already vetoed one bill, House Bill 1132, that would have expanded the state's child care assistance program for child care employees. Here's where things stand as of Friday morning. Multiple education bills were delivered to Rhoden's desk on Wednesday and Thursday and await his signature, including: House Bill 1040 would make students pay more, and let the state pay less, for students to take high school dual credit courses that give them college credit. House Bill 1041, which repeals some of the duties of the state library and its board, including providing certain specialized library services and operating a state publication library distribution program, but adding braille and talking book services. House Bill 1114 would give the South Dakota Board of Technical Education $4 million to purchase equipment for education in high-demand workforce fields like building trades, health care, welding, radiation and more. House Bill 1239, which would make public schools and public libraries create policies allowing people to appeal books to school and library boards to determine if they're obscene. Initially, the bill would have removed defenses for librarians charged with disseminating material harmful to minors. House Bill 1259 would segregate restrooms in public schools and state-owned facilities by sex assigned at birth. Opponents have called it anti-trans, and the Transformation Project has sent emails to allies telling them to ask Rhoden to veto the bill as former Gov. Dennis Daugaard did for a similar bill in 2016. Senate Bill 100, which would allow college students to concealed-carry firearms on the state's public technical college and university campuses with an enhanced permit. And, two bills containing the state budget, House Bill 1046 and Senate Bill 55. Three different school choice finance bills heavily opposed by educators and education lobbyists failed this session, including: House Bill 1009, which would have created $7,405 educational empowerment accounts in the form of a debit card for parents of students attending private school to spend on tuition, fees, textbooks and curriculum, educational therapies, testing fees, transportation, technology and more. It would have cost the state up to $160 million. House Bill 1020, which would have created $3,000 education savings accounts that parents of students in private or alternative instruction could have used in a South Dakota Department of Education account and marketplace on tuition, fees, curriculum, technology or testing fees. It would have cost the state up to $64 million. Senate Bill 190, which would have given property owners a property tax credit to use to cover education expenses like tuition, fees, textbooks, curriculum or more for any child age 5-18 in a nonpublic school or receiving alternative education, losing districts anywhere from $33 million to $126 million in revenue statewide. Two different bills that came as a reaction to the Sioux Falls School District and other local area schools switching to a cashless ticketing system failed, and one was signed into law. Those three bills are: House Bill 1017, which would have required school districts accept cash payments for admission to school events, failed to be reconsidered in the House. House Bill 1048, which would have required cash payments be accepted as payment for any goods or services sold to a customer under $100, was killed in the House Commerce and Energy committee. Senate Bill 219, which will require public schools and accredited private schools to accept cash payments for admission to school-affiliated events, was signed by Rhoden on March 11. Activities directors from the district have testified that people aren't turned away at the gate if they want to pay with cash, and said it isn't a large-scale issue or widespread community concern. Forty representatives voted to kill House Bill 1201, which would have alerted parents if their student talked to their school nurse, counselor, teacher, administrator or another school staff member about their gender identity. HB 1201 also would have prohibited school staff from teaching about gender identity and expression, encouraging or coercing a student to believe gender is different from sex, and not telling parents that their student perceives their gender is inconsistent with their sex assigned at birth. A similar type of bill, House Bill 1177, which would have prohibited school employees from facing disciplinary action if they misgendered a student or failed to call them by their current, preferred name, was killed in the House Education committee. Attempts to inject religion into public schools — by way of chaplains, the Ten Commandments and state motto 'Under God the people rule' — all failed this legislative session. So did a proposal to require education on the Oceti Sakowin Essential Understandings standards after similar bills failed in the 2021, 2022 and 2024 legislative sessions. Rep. Kadyn Wittman, D-Sioux Falls, tried for a third time to remove costs for students eligible for free or reduced-price meals, and to reimburse districts who pick up those costs with state funds, but her proposal failed in the House Appropriations Committee. One new law: students 16 and older can withdraw from school if their parent, guardian or other custodian gives written consent after Rhoden signed Senate Bill 71 on March 5. This article originally appeared on Sioux Falls Argus Leader: South Dakota education bills that passed or failed in the Legislature
Yahoo
11-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Senate amends bill, will not send librarians to jail
SIOUX FALLS, S.D. (KELO) — Republican South Dakota Senator Lauren Nelson lead the charge in the Senate for House Bill 1239, a bill which some argued was a threat to librarians. Debate on the measure was spirited, including arguments about responsibility, culture wars and the hypothetical hanging of librarians. Troopers find 250lbs of Marijuana in traffic stop The bill would have removed legal protections for those working at a school, college, university, museum or public library if they were accused of providing obscene or harmful material to minors. Nelson said HB1239 was simply providing teeth for the existing law. Jodi Fick, Director for Siouxland Libraries, which has13 branch locations across Sioux Falls and Minnehaha County provided this statement on the measure prior to the Senate debate. House Bill 1239 would change the legal standing of professionals, including librarians, and open them up to legal consequences when minors inadvertently access material deemed 'harmful to minors' – even if those materials are in an adult section of the library. Siouxland Libraries currently has established policies and procedures in place that allow community members to challenge materials if they have concerns. Our existing policies respect the right of parents and guardians to determine what materials are suitable for their own families. If the Senate passes House Bill 1239, and Governor Rhoden chooses to sign it into law, Siouxland Libraries would need to make significant changes in operations or policies to ensure the safety and well-being of our staff and guests while complying with the new state law. Jodi Fick, Siouxland Libraries Opposition came early from Democrat Sen. Jamie Smith, who called this an instance of national politics being brought into South Dakota, and arguing the issue addresses by the bill is not an actual issue in South Dakota. Smith outlined various measures already in place, including systems to remove books or to flag specific student accounts if their parents wish. 'Instead what we're going to do is demonize one more profession,' said Smith. 'We're going to make it possible to actually arrest our librarians.' Much of the proponent debate struck on the themes of accountability for libraries and disgust for the content of certain books. If somebody had knowingly given that to my children when they were little, I'd want them strung up from the nearest tree. Senator Taffy Howard Republican Sen. Taffy Howard spoke about an excerpt from one of the books she looked at. 'I opened it up and right away it was like, oh my goodness,' said Howard, saying that the shut the text immediately. 'None of our children should be exposed to this garbage. It's absolute garbage,' Howard said, arguing that librarians should not be allowed to provide these books to kids. 'I don't care what your job is, no one should be able to hide behind their job and use that as a way to provide this garbage to our children,' said Howard, adding that she doesn't know if any librarians actually are providing these books. 'If somebody had knowingly given that to my children when they were little, I'd want them strung up from the nearest tree.' Another theme of opposition was parental rights. Republican Sen. Tamara Grove spoke of the lack of agency that individual parents have regarding what books library systems have. 'If a parent wanted to do something — there's nothing that they can do,' she said. Before discussion on the bill could continue, and amendment was brought by Republican Sen. David Wheeler. This amendment stripped the language that would result in potential criminal charges from the bill, and instead inserted sections that would allow for judicial review of a school board's decision on a book in the event that a parent disagrees with that decision. Wheeler argued that while the Senate could probably come to an agreement that a handful of books used as an example should not be available to children, there are hundreds of books out there that may offend different people for different reasons. 'How many of those are we going to agree on,' said Wheeler, arguing that judicial review would allow for the decision to be made by someone who understands the law, without subjecting librarians and teachers with the threat of criminal prosecution. Howard was the first to speak against the amendment, though her thoughts were echoed by others. Howard's opposition to the amendment began with a question about who would pay for the court costs if a parent decided to appeal a district's decision. Wheeler answered that the cost would be on whoever decided to bring the appeal, and Howard argued that such a process puts too great a burden on parents, using her own mother, who was a single mother as an example, and saying she never could have afforded to take it to court. Nelson echoed Howard's statement and argued that the crux of the bill was the ability to criminally charge people. 'This amendment just simply it guts the bill,' Nelson said. 'It would turn the bill into something that says 'you don't have an affirmative defense' or — for something — 'you can't be charged with anyway'. And that's the crux of it.' Instead, Nelson says the amendment perpetuates the status quo and would leave schools unaccountable. Speaking in favor of the amendment was Republican Sen. Steve Kolbeck, who argued that this is a local issue, and not one that should be addressed state wide. Kolbeck, like Smith, noted that there are already systems in place to address material parents find objectional. 'We already have a process. And that's my issue with the bill,' he said. Instead, Kolbeck advocated for talking to your local librarians. 'I know my librarians — Mary and Wilma,' said Kolbeck. 'There isn't a rampant problem with librarians. And if you don't know your local librarian, or if you haven't called your local librarian to double check that these [books] are in there, I think that you should vote no on this bill.' I dare everybody who wants to vote for this bill, who thinks we should help hold the librarians accountable to look in the gallery today, look in the eyes of these librarians that are up here and say, 'I don't trust you.' Senator Stephanie Sauder Republican Sen. Stephanie Sauder also spoke, giving a more forceful statement in support of the amendment. 'No one has been able to tell me — and I've asked this a lot of times since this all has come up — how many actual incidences have been reported,' said Sauder. 'There haven't been any in my district.' Here Sauder issued a challenge to those who preferred the original text of the bill. 'I dare everybody who wants to vote for this bill, who thinks we should help hold the librarians accountable to look in the gallery today, look in the eyes of these librarians that are up here and say, 'I don't trust you.'' said Sauder. 'I dare you to do that. And then vote yes on this.' Wheeler's amendment passed 18-16. Following this vote, discussion turned to passage of the amended version of the bill, with many of the proponents of the original version expressing their displeasure with the amendment, and the less forceful impact. Despite that, all of those lawmakers voted to pass the amended version, with the bill passing on a vote of 32-2, with the only opponents being Democrats Smith and Liz Larson, each of whom had opposed the initial bill. As the bill has been amended, it will need to be re-approved by the House. Nelson urged senators to vote yes on the amended bill. She implied the fight wasn't over. 'It will go to conference committee. We'll see what happens there.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
07-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Bill removing librarian defense heads for Senate floor
SIOUX FALLS S.D. (KELO) — A bill that proponents say would remove defenses for librarians, but opponents say may lead to librarians being arrested for what book a child reads is heading to the Senate floor. House Bill 1239 would update South Dakota's criminal code to remove current protections given to public schools and libraries preventing them from being charged with crimes for distributing material they deem 'harmful to minors.' CO2 pipeline company reacts to pipeline bill signing On Thursday, HB 1239 passed through the Senate Judiciary committee 5-2 and will now move the Senate floor, if passed there the bill will then go to Gov. Larry Rhoden's desk for further consideration. The bill states obscene material would be banned through what's known as 'The Miller test.' The Miller test is a three-part test used to determine if material is obscene. It was established by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1973. South Dakota's current law protects librarians at schools, universities and other places from being charged with giving minors harmful materials if it's part of their job. Amy Bruner of Sioux Falls said the goal of the bill is not to get anybody arrested, but to give parents a leg to stand on. 'It will establish guardrails for defining what is not allowed in schools and libraries and legally binding these public institutions to keep obscene material away from minors,' Bruner said. 'The bill will give parents and community members a leg to stand on when we approach our libraries and school boards.' Lisa Gennaro, with Concerned Women for America, who said minors are bombarded with overtly sexual content and the library is another place it's happening. 'Sexual literature desensitizes readers to violence the same way porn does, novels market non-consensual sex, normalizing it and further feeding into rape culture,' Gennaro said. 'We've got great libraries. This is just another way that it's happening.' Sam Matson, Lobbyist with the South Dakota Trial Lawyers Association, said the bill would limit access on educational materials. 'I don't want South Dakota to become a book banning state and I fear that this bill is the first step in accomplishing that,' Matson said. 'Removing the affirmative defense for schools, libraries, and museums could have serious consequences.' Robin Lerseth of Pierre said the bill won't protect children but only lead to staffing difficulties. 'HB 1239 will not ensure that my children are shielded from harmful material the only way to do that is ensure family's use common sense,' Lerseth said. 'Common sense tells me it is not the librarian's fault if my child wanders away from the children's section of the library and finds something questionable.' Republican Sen. Helene Duhamel said she believes it's ultimately the parents job to shield their child from material they might find obscene. 'Is it the librarians job or the legislatures job to decide what your child reads? I think it is the role of the parent. Should the librarian be held liable if a child checks out inappropriate material, arguably all books in a library have literary value, so it's most appropriate for the parent to make that decision,' Duhamel said. Republican Sen. Tom Pischke, responded to Duhamel's comments saying that the legislature does make laws around things like tobacco and alcohol for children that they don't leave up the parents discretion. 'We protect kids, nobody is bringing a bill to not let kids smoke, not let kids vape, we have all kinds of protections in the law to protect kids, that's what we do here as a legislature.' Pischke said. 'You cant just say leave this to the parents.' Republican Sen. Amber Hulse, said while she would be voting for the bill, she believes it's not solving the problem of getting these books off the shelf. She added that this could cause many librarians to leave the profession. 'I do think the intentions on this bill are noble, do I think this is this is the best approach on how to do that I don't really think so,' Hulse said. ' I don't know if this bill is really getting to the meat of what the problem is and as legislators we are supposed to ask what the problem is and if the bill actually solves it.' Republican Sen. Tamara R. Grove, said this bill is about deterring bad behavior and allowing parents the opportunity to be heard. 'There is no cause of action as a parent, so I can't file with the states attorney, I cant do all of these things, I just have to be subjected to whatever the schools determine is ok to be on the shelves,' Grove said. 'I've heard it's up to the parents… well the parents are here and they are saying they don't have a voice.' Republican Sen David Wheeler, said this bill isn't going to change what's obscene and not obscene or what books are going to be on the shelf. He added he doesn't want librarians making decisions on books because they are being threatened by parents. 'It only changes the ability of people to threaten librarians with criminal conduct if they don't agree with them, there's a huge range of what could possibly be obscene material,' Wheeler said. 'Our libraries are supposed to be centers of information and thought and that can be a wide range and it can be controversial and we don't want them to be liable because something crosses the line.' Yes- Blanc (R), Grove (R), Mehlhaff (R), Pischke (R), Hulse (R), No- Duhamel (R), Wheeler (R) Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
06-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
SD Senate will consider repealing obscenity prosecution protection for librarians
Rep. Bethany Soye, R-Sioux Falls, speaks on the House floor on Jan. 16, 2024. (Makenzie Huber/South Dakota Searchlight) The decision to keep or repeal a clause in South Dakota law that protects librarians from criminal penalties for the knowing distribution of 'harmful' material to minors is in the hands of the state Senate. The Senate Judiciary Committee voted 5-2 on Thursday at the Capitol in Pierre to endorse a bill that would change the law. Disseminating materials harmful to minors is punishable by up to a year in jail and a $2,000 fine. Existing law makes being a public librarian an 'affirmative defense' against prosecution. Sioux Falls Republican Rep. Bethany Soye is the prime sponsor of House Bill 1239. It would remove the affirmative defense for librarians for distributing the pornographic content Soye alleges is found on public bookshelves across South Dakota. Schools, universities and museums would also lose the defense. South Dakota House advances bill that lawmaker slams as 'locking up librarians' She pointed to a book series called 'A Court of Thorns and Roses,' and included excerpts from it and other materials available in public libraries in a document she distributed to senators. Soye said books in the series are available in public libraries in Brookings, Madison, Sioux Falls, Rapid City, Vermillion and Yankton, among others. Rapid City Republican Sen. Greg Blanc, a pastor, said he hadn't wanted to 'do his homework' by reading the excerpts, and that doing so made him want to 'go home and take a shower.' 'Most taxpayers don't see the necessity of pornography being available in taxpayer funded institutions,' Blanc said. The bill narrowly cleared the House floor last week after heated debate, during which one opponent decried the proposal as a pathway to 'locking up librarians.' On Thursday, Soye called that rhetoric overblown. Parents have asked librarians to remove books, but Soye said they haven't listened and need an incentive to take community concerns more seriously. Twelve states don't have affirmative defense protections for librarians, Soye said, and librarians haven't been locked up in any of them. 'If it had happened, you'd know about it, because it would have been national news,' she said. Existing state law criminalizes the knowing distribution of obscenity, or possession of obscenity with the intention to distribute it to minors. Soye said librarians would not commit a crime under her bill unless they made an active choice to have obscene material in their collection, keep it on the shelf, and allow kids to check it out. 'No one will accidentally violate this,' Soye said. Opponents weren't so sure. 'The inherent problem with obscenity testing is that you're going to be making subjective calls,' said Cash Anderson, a lobbyist for the South Dakota Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. Legislative committee endorses prosecution of librarians who lend books deemed harmful to children Obscene material is generally protected for adults by the First Amendment, but the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that governments can regulate its access by minors. It created a three-part test in the 1973 case of Miller v. California to determine if something is obscene, and therefore legal to regulate. It must appeal to the prurient interest of the average person, depict sexual conduct in a way that is offensive, and lack serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value. Sen. Amber Hulse, R-Hot Springs, said literary value is subjective, and debates about it will likely go to court if Soye's bill passes. Hulse said she'd been inundated with emails on the bill, half for it and half against it. She voted to send the bill to the Senate floor so the full body would have a chance to cast a vote on behalf of their constituents, she said. Sen. David Wheeler, R-Huron, went the other way. He agreed with opponents, who alleged that parents who fail to convince librarians to agree with them on a book's lack of literary virtues are essentially weaponizing the justice system to get their way. Debates on what is or isn't obscene should happen in public, at the local level, Wheeler said. 'We deal with it through the democratic process,' Wheeler said. 'We don't deal with it through criminal prosecution.' Sen. Jim Mehlhaff, R-Pierre, said he'd come to the committee hearing prepared to side with the local government officials in his district who'd urged him to say no. Reading the passages in Soye's handout on books now available in public libraries and testimony from the bill's supporters changed his mind, he said. 'We keep seeing bills like this because libraries are not responsive to parent concerns,' Mehlhaff said. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
