Legislature clears Gov. Kristi Noem’s revamp of riot laws

March 5, 2020

PIERRE, S.D. (AP) — Gov. Kristi Noem’s proposal to revive the state’s criminal and civil punishments for riots passed a final Senate vote on Thursday and will next proceed to her desk.

The issue has drawn demonstrations, lawsuits and passionate testimony over the past year as the Republican-dominated Legislature sought to tighten the state’s laws on riot and incitement to riot ahead of expected construction of the Keystone XL pipeline. Noem argued that the bill uses the “narrowest” definitions of rioting and inciting a riot and only goes after people who commit violence or cause damage. But opponents said the bill would have a “chilling effect” on peaceful protests and creates a false narrative that Native American people are violent.

The Legislature passed a similar law last year aimed at demonstrations against the pipeline. At the time, Noem argued that it was necessary to have civil penalties for people or groups that fund violent demonstrations, calling the action “riot boosting.” But a federal judge last year found parts of that law, as well as several older laws on the books, to be unconstitutional.

Noem asked lawmakers to try again this year to update the state’s criminal and civil penalties for rioting, arguing they are necessary to “protect people and property.” Ahead of the Senate vote, she told reporters that the bill protects free speech and would be used against people who fund demonstrations “only if they’re involved in those protests.”

Sen. Lee Schoenbeck, a Watertown Republican, called the federal judge’s ruling a “powerful statement about the First Amendment,” but argued that it was necessary to pass the bill to put riot laws back on the books.

“If you want to peacefully protest, you should like this bill,” he told lawmakers as he argued in support of the bill. He called people who caused damage during demonstrations against the Dakota Access Pipeline in North Dakota “terrorists.”

Democrats spoke against the bill, arguing that it has the same flaws as last year’s law. This year’s bill makes it a felony to “urge” force or violence against people or property, but they argued that is just as vague as the word used to describe inciting a riot in the old law — “encourage.”

Sen. Red Dawn Foster, a Pine Ridge Democrat and member of the Oglala Sioux Tribe, said the bill shapes a “narrative that we are inherently violent.” Native American groups opposed to bill have emphasized they are only planning peaceful demonstrations and showed their intent by holding prayers before and after their demonstrations at the Capitol.

Foster said, “It’s unfortunate that we are creating a law at the benefit of a foreign company at the expense of the people of South Dakota.”

After the bill passed, the American Civil Liberties Union called for a “comprehensive plan that prevents the escalation of tension” between protesters and law enforcement.

Lawmakers also amended a separate bill on Thursday to stipulate that only the state, counties or towns could receive payments from the civil penalties and gets rid of the term “riot boosting.” That bill has not yet passed.