Bluestem Prairie

Change is ‘eminent’: Property-rights fight transforms this year’s SD Legislature

Another development in the ethanol carbon pipeline saga.

From the South Dakota Searchlight.

Change is ‘eminent’: Property-rights fight transforms this year’s SD Legislature
by Joshua Haiar

When the majority leaders of South Dakota’s two legislative chambers introduced legislation last January that they described as a compromise on carbon dioxide pipelines, they predicted “a consequential year for lawmakers in Pierre.”

They didn’t think they’d be the ones suffering the consequences.

Their legislation passed in March and promptly sparked a backlash. Voters ousted 14 Republican legislators in the June primary election, including 11 who voted for the most controversial bill in the pipeline package. Pipeline opponents gathered enough petition signatures to refer that bill to voters, who rejected it in the Nov. 5 general election.

A few days after that, Republican legislators went behind closed doors and voted to replace their leadership team, mostly with members who voted against the spurned pipeline bill.

Last year’s Republican majority leaders, Rep. Will Mortenson of Fort Pierre and Sen. Casey Crabtree of Madison, are back in the Legislature after winning reelection in their districts, but have been cast out of leadership. The annual lawmaking session began earlier this month at the Capitol in Pierre and continues through March 13.

Michael Card is an associate professor emeritus of political science at the University of South Dakota. He said Mortenson and Crabtree probably did not realize they were sowing the seeds of an intra-party rebellion when they introduced their pipeline bills last January. 

“I do think they were blindsided,” Card said. “They thought they’d done a really good job for landowners.” 

Scott Odenbach, the new Republican House majority leader from Spearfish, put it more bluntly in a recent interview with South Dakota Public Broadcasting. He said the supporters of last year’s legislation “awakened a sleeping giant” and “fundamentally miscalculated the depth of passion amongst landowners in South Dakota” for property rights.

The spark

The $9 billion pipeline proposal at the center of the drama is from Iowa-based Summit Carbon Solutions. 

The pipeline would transport carbon dioxide captured from 57 ethanol plants in five states to an underground sequestration site in North Dakota, along a route that includes 700 miles in eastern South Dakota. Federal tax credits intended to incentivize the removal of heat-trapping carbon from the atmosphere are motivating the project.

The South Dakota Public Utilities Commission rejected Summit’s first permit application in 2023, in part because of the route’s conflicts with local ordinances mandating minimum distances between pipelines and existing features. Summit reapplied late last year with what it described as “major reroutes.” 

The company says it has about 80% of the land access agreements it needs in South Dakota. Landowners who’ve refused to sign easements say they’re protecting their property rights and are concerned about potential leaks that could release deadly carbon dioxide plumes. They’ve attracted supporters from across the political spectrum, including some Republican climate change deniers who view carbon capture projects as boondoggles and some Democrats concerned about the fate of family farms.

To gain access to the rest of the land, Summit may have to pursue eminent domain, a legal process in which a court determines fair compensation for landowners. The state Supreme Court ruled last year that Summit had not proven its project is eligible for eminent domain. The high court sent the matter back to a lower court, where the company is trying to prove its case.

One of the members of the new Republican legislative leadership team is Rep. Karla Lems, R-Canton, who was chosen to assist the House speaker as speaker pro tempore. The Summit pipeline would cross her land, and her opposition to eminent domain motivated her to run for the Legislature and win in 2022. 

Lems introduced a bill in 2023 to ban carbon pipelines from using eminent domain in the state. The legislation passed the House but died in a Senate committee. 

Some senators who opposed the bill said South Dakota’s corn and ethanol industries could collapse without the pipeline. The project would lower ethanol production’s carbon footprint and keep the gasoline additive eligible for sale in markets such as California, where stricter laws on carbon emissions are in place.

Lems said testimony on the bill reflected a divide in the Republican Party. She described it as “constitutional conservatives versus the corporatists.”

Crabtree disagrees with that. He said President Donald Trump’s nominee to lead the U.S. Interior Department, former North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum, is a supporter of Summit’s project.

“The Trump administration supports this project, too,” Crabtree said. “So, are they corporatists or constitutional conservatives?”

No legislation addressing pipeline opponents’ concerns passed by the end of the 2023 legislative session. The following summer, hundreds of people descended on the state Capitol for a rally, demanding lawmakers reconvene in Pierre to pass a bill prohibiting eminent domain for carbon pipelines.

Mortenson had voted for the eminent domain ban in the House, but he did not attend the summer rally. He said in a statement at the time that unless “we get agreement with the Senate on some proposals, we shouldn’t call a special session and neither should the governor. It would be a waste of taxpayer dollars and legislator time.” 

“For my part, I’ll be spending the next couple months working with senators to gather consensus on protecting landowners. I hope we get the job done,” he added.

A ‘path forward’ creates division

Mortenson’s determination to find consensus with senators resulted in the three-bill package that he and Crabtree unveiled for the 2024 legislative session. Their jointly written statement promoting the legislation did not mention eminent domain. Legislation banning eminent domain had failed, so Mortenson and Crabtree were pursuing a different path.

They described it as “a path forward that benefits landowners and sets clear expectations of regulatory and procedural requirements for those who want to do business in South Dakota.”

In other words, the legislation would not ban eminent domain or stop any company from pursuing a pipeline, but would implement new protections for landowners and local governments affected by pipelines.

All three bills passed. Of the two that remain in effect today, one requires pipeline companies to provide more information to landowners when giving them notice of a land survey, forces pipeline companies to pay each landowner $500 for a survey, and empowers landowners to file court challenges against a company’s right to conduct a survey. The other law defines carbon pipeline easements, limits them to 99 years, voids them if a project isn’t commenced within five years of the easement’s signing or the issuance of a permit, and says they cannot be transferred without the consent of the property owner.   

The third bill, which has since been tossed out by voters, had new protections for landowners and local governments. 

Those included the right of counties to impose a surcharge on carbon pipelines, with half of the revenue going to property tax relief for affected landowners; a requirement that pipelines be buried at least 4 feet deep; an imposition of liability on pipeline companies for leaks and for damages caused to underground drain tile that farmers use to remove excess moisture from fields; a requirement for pipeline companies to file agricultural impact mitigation plans and carbon dioxide dispersal models; and a mandate that land agents acting on behalf of pipeline companies be either a resident of South Dakota or a real estate agent licensed in the state.

But all of those aspects of the third bill were ultimately tossed out by voters, largely because of another provision in the bill that pipeline opponents found most offensive. That was a requirement for local governments to demonstrate that their restrictions on pipeline locations are reasonable, rather than a pipeline company having to prove those regulations unreasonable. Pipeline opponents said that provision would make it easier for state regulators to override local ordinances and approve pipeline permits, thereby paving the way for pipeline companies to use eminent domain.

Mortenson said the bill had nothing to do with eminent domain, but it became a rallying cry for the activists who referred the bill to a public vote.

“There was a lot of enthusiasm stemming from the eminent domain question,” Mortenson said. “I think that enthusiasm mapped itself onto the referral effort.”

Pipeline opponents have seen how important it is to protect local siting ordinances. The conflicts between those ordinances and Summit’s original route played a major role in the Public Utilities Commission’s decision to reject Summit’s first permit application in 2023. 

So pipeline opponents drew a line in the sand with Senate Bill 201, which became Referred Law 21 on the Nov. 5 ballot.

“Lawmakers either stood with property rights, or they put corporate greed first,” said Ed Fischbach, a farmer from Mellette. “Leadership sided with ethanol and the pipeline — Republican and Democrat both. Guys like me, a former Democrat, were reregistering to vote for conservatives who were willing to take a stand, because property rights is the biggest issue in this state right now.”

Mortenson said the burden-of-proof flip was not as significant as it was made out to be, because supporters and opponents would still have had to present their best evidence to the Public Utilities Commission, regardless of which side had the burden of proof regarding local ordinances.   

Grassroots mobilization

After last year’s legislative session, pipeline opponents organized rallies at barns, rural community centers and county fairs.

Joy Hohn, R-Sioux Falls, took part in the effort as she ran successfully for a seat in the state Senate.

“We showed up everywhere people cared about property rights,” Hohn said.

In a few months, they submitted an estimated 28,000 petition signatures to put Senate Bill 201 on the ballot as Referred Law 21.

They also spread the word about lawmakers who voted for the bill and encouraged voters to toss them out, resulting in 11 of those lawmakers losing in the June primary.

Mortenson said a large and motivated group can have an outsized influence on a primary. Turnout in June was 17%. 

“We’ve had common sense conservative governance for decades,” Mortenson said. “When people are happy with how things are going, they’re more likely to stay home. When people are really fired up, they go and vote. I don’t doubt there was an enthusiasm gap in that election.”

The movement’s momentum carried into the November general election, where Referred Law 21 was thrown out by South Dakota voters. That happened despite supporters of the bill, including ethanol companies, spending 10 times more on their campaign.

Mark Lapka is a Republican farmer from Leola and pipeline opponent who won a seat in the state Senate in November.

“When property rights were being put at risk for climate change, people just had enough,” he said. “People just wanted to be left alone.”

Eminent domain ban proposed

As the Legislature convened earlier this month for its annual lawmaking session, one bill that would ban eminent domain for carbon pipelines was already prefiled in the Senate, and a similar bill soon followed in the House.

Lems said she’s confident the legislation will pass, and Crabtree also said it could pass. Gov. Kristi Noem would then have to decide whether to sign it into law. Or the decision could fall to Lt. Gov. Larry Rhoden, who will be elevated to governor if the U.S. Senate confirms Noem as President Donald Trump’s Homeland Security secretary.

The Governor’s Office did not immediately respond to a question about whether Noem or Rhoden would be willing to sign a ban on eminent domain for carbon pipelines.

Photo: Rep. Karla Lems, R-Canton, speaks to hundreds of rally attendees in Pierre on Jan. 13, 2025, during an event highlighting opposition to a carbon dioxide pipeline. (Joshua Haiar/South Dakota Searchlight).

This South Dakota Searchlight article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. 

Related posts

• Hundreds pack SD PUC Summit ethanol carbon pipeline hearings in Watertown and Aberdeen
• 100s attend first day of SD PUC ethanol carbon pipeline meetings in Mitchell and Sioux Falls
• Federal regulators announce proposed rule for CO2 pipeline safety
• Carbon pipeline opponents rallied Monday in Pierre amid push for eminent domain ban
• North Dakota landowners appeal Summit ethanol carbon storage decision 
• Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline company formally asks SD regulator to recuse herself 
• South Dakota Public Utilities Commissioner stays on new carbon pipeline case after prior recusal, with no explanation this time
• Punt! Lincoln County commissioners push back decision on ethanol carbon pipeline rules
• Summit Carbon Solutions in the news: landowners & counties appeal North Dakota pipeline permit; Summit tells Iowans to cease & desist; Pipeline Fighters Hub & CURE statements
• North Dakota Industrial Commission approves CO2 storage for Summit ethanol carbon pipeline
• Minnesota PUC granted a permit for Summit Carbon Solutions Otter Tail to Wilkin County pipeline
• South Dakota Public Utilities Commission schedules public input meetings on Summit carbon pipeline application
• Summit ethanol CO2 injection wells up for approval but court appeal already in the works
• Oh the irony: ethanol carbon pipeline company has failed to address crossing concerns, DAPL oil pipeline company says
• Iowa Supreme Court upholds land survey abilities of pipeline companies in Summit case
• U.S. appeals court hears Summit pipeline case against Iowa's Shelby and Story counties
• Never mind the voters: ethanol carbon pipeline company reapplies for South Dakota permit
• Summit ethanol carbon pipeline news digest: Summit sues another Iowa county and more!
• North Dakota Public Service Commission approves Summit carbon pipeline route
• North Dakota couple plans to ‘dig in’ if Summit ethanol carbon pipeline is approved
• Summit ethanol carbon pipeline news digest: CO2 pipeline in MN moves forward; ND Public Service Commission decision coming Friday
• SD pipeline foes secure legislative leadership; MN Summit decision could come Dec. 12
• In unofficial results, ethanol carbon-pipeline law tossed out by South Dakota voters 
• CURE: MN Administrative Law Judge’s report on Summit’s CO 2 pipeline expected November 4
• Seven South Dakota ballot measures, $7 million and counting: Reports reveal total spending
• Jeepers: ethanol coop kicks in another $400,000 to support carbon pipeline ballot question 
• Ethanol carbon news digest: Summit Carbon pipeline in MN, Iowa & North Dakota media
• Summit Carbon Solutions CEO asks for prayer, while MN PUC wants public comment on FEIS of Otter Tail – Wilkin portion of CO2 Pipeline
• Public can comment on Otter Tail – Wilkin Co section of ethanol carbon pipeline until Sept. 11
• VIDEO: Carbon capture in Minnesota: public lands, fast money, and pipe dreams
• Summit pipeline segment enters final permitting stages in Minnesota; CURE raises objections
• Ethanol is fueling support of South Dakota carbon pipeline ballot measure
• Pipeline Fighters Hub: Summit Carbon Solutions numbers don’t add up in South Dakota 
• Referred Law 21 & carbon pipelines: A landowner bill of rights or an undermining of local control
• Summit Carbon Solution's ethanol carbon pipeline takes #2 spot on Heatmap's The Most At-Risk Projects of The Energy Transition 
• Ethanol carbon pipeline news: Attorneys differ on meaning of common carrier law in Summit case
• Summit Carbon Solutions pipelines won’t capture all carbon emitted by ethanol plants
• South Dakota Supreme Court ruling complicates Summit Carbon Solution’s push for land
• Referred pipeline law puts Summit Carbon Solution's permit quest in limbo
• Breaking crowded South Dakota ballot news: carbon pipeline law referendum validated
• Sustainable jet fuel company Gevo contributes $167K in defense of carbon pipeline law
• South Dakota Property Rights and Local Control Alliance turns in petitions to SD Secretary of State to force a vote on carbon pipeline policy
• South Dakota District 1 GOP House primary news round-up: carbon pipeline politics major issue
• New Midwest battles brew over CO2 pipelines

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Loves CCS too: MNHouse energy committee votes to lift nuclear moratorium, alter renewable deadlines

This bill, heard in committee on Tuesday, isn't getting much attention.

While the Session Daily article below highlights lifting the state's nuclear moratorium and altering renewable deadlines, I find one of the bullet points in the article just as interesting:

Subject to some conditions, the proposed legislation would also. . .

• make it state policy to support carbon capture and sequestration technologies . . .

Is that an endorsement of ethanol carbon pipelines?

As of this posting (January 22, a.m.), there is no Senate companion bill.

Here's Session Daily's coverage:

Energy committee votes to lift nuclear moratorium, alter renewable deadlines
by Rob Hubbard

Want to build a nuclear power plant? You currently can’t in Minnesota. But that could change.

Sponsored by Rep. Chris Swedzinski (R-Ghent), HF9 would revise a handful of provisions in state law regarding the use of renewable energy sources. And lifting the state’s moratorium on new construction of nuclear power plants is among its aims.

On Tuesday, the House Energy Finance and Policy Committee approved the bill, as amended, and sent it to the House Taxes Committee because one facet of the bill deals with expanding a sales tax exemption.

“This bill will make our electric utilities better able to ensure reliability and lower rates,” Swedzinski said. “Xcel Energy has recently approached the Public Utilities Commission with a request to raise rates 9% in 2025 and a potential almost 4% in 2026 due to the increased costs associated with meeting the DFL’s clean energy standard. And those increases will have a chilling effect on business expansion and development here in our state.”

Subject to some conditions, the proposed legislation would also:

• lift restrictions on the maximum output for a hydroelectric facility to meet the renewable energy standard;
• delay for three years the deadline for electric utilities to meet renewable, solar or carbon-free standards;
• prohibit the demolition of electric generating plants powered by fossil fuels;
• make it state policy to support carbon capture and sequestration technologies; and
• expand the sales tax exemption for residential heating fuels and electricity.

While some testifiers praised the potential lifting of the moratorium on new nuclear plant construction, Blake Johnson, government relations specialist for the Prairie Island Indian Community, expressed concern.

“Our reservation sits less than 700 yards away from a plant and over 1,000 tons of nuclear waste stored from that plant,” he said. “We are the closest community, Native or non-Native, in the nation to a nuclear power plant and stored nuclear waste.

“We understand the reason for this discussion, what with the increased need for baseload electricity that’s coming with data centers and artificial intelligence that must comply with the carbon-free standards passed in 2023,” Johnson said. “But, with increased nuclear generation, there will be increased nuclear waste. And Prairie Island has had a front-row seat to the nation’s failed nuclear storage policy.”

Rick Evans, director of regional government affairs for Xcel Energy, said the utility plans to keep the state’s nuclear power plants at Prairie Island and Monticello operating into the 2050s. But he said the company’s support for lifting the nuclear moratorium will “depend on the full support of the Prairie Island Indian Community.”

Evans added that Xcel Energy does not support the bill’s provision restricting the demolition of plants that use fossil fuels for electricity production, saying that it may frustrate community plans for redevelopment of a site and end up costing ratepayers more.

With no DFL members were in attendance, all Republican members were present and voted for the bill. Said Rep. Dave Baker (R-Willmar): “Energy needs to be the kind of committee that we all do in a bipartisan way when it comes to this kind of large policy. Because you can’t be swinging back and forth with policy.”

Here's the Minnesota House Information Services YouTube of the hearing:

Photo: Blake Johnson, government relations specialist at the Prairie Island Indian Community, testifies before the House energy committee during a discussion of a renewable energy policy bill sponsored by Rep. Chris Swedzinski. (Photo by Andrew VonBank).

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

State cut could hurt local SD library resources ranging from dishwasher research to genealogy

The creative project I'm working on has brought home the value of local libraries, and past work as an employee of The Library Company of Philadelphia installed that understanding years ago.

In mid-December, I'd republished the South Dakota Searchlight article,  Noem's proposed SD State Library budget cut would hamstring local libraries, opponents say.

Today, commentary about the issue republished from the South Dakota Searchlight. And yes, I have a library card with the Wilmont Public Library. Like Library Company founder Benjamin Franklin and his peers, and West River commentator Mary Garrigan, I appreciate the value of a library.

State cut could hurt local library resources ranging from dishwasher research to genealogy
by Mary Garrigan

My dishwasher is on its deathbed, so I did what I always do when I need to purchase a new household appliance. I went to my local library, logged into the Consumer Reports online  database and researched which dishwashers get top ratings.

I don’t pay for a subscription to Consumer Reports magazine, but the Rapid City Public Library does. Since I’m a Pennington County taxpayer with a library card, I can browse its digital version whenever I want to make an important consumer purchase. It’s just one of the many things I love about the Rapid City library. (I could even choose to read about dishwasher ratings from the comfort of my home computer armed only with my library card number, but I really like libraries, so I use any excuse to visit mine.)

Like most library lovers in South Dakota, I don’t much care for Gov. Kristi Noem’s recent proposal to cut the South Dakota State Library’s 2026 fiscal year budget by $1 million (more than $2 million, if you count the $1.3 million in federal funding that the State Library may lose if it is unable to leverage federal grants with the required local match.) If the budget reduction is approved, more than half of its staff would be cut.

With the 2025 legislative session underway in Pierre, I’m counting on the fact that there are lots of other public library patrons who will let legislators know that they don’t like Noem’s cuts either.

South Dakota has about 130 libraries, branch libraries and bookmobiles (not counting school libraries) that serve the public in communities large and small. About 90% of all South Dakotans have access to a local library, even if only about 40% of us bother to register for a library card, according to 2023 statistics gathered by the State Library. Plenty more visit their local library without bothering to get a card.

Libraries are typically funded by local governments, but every single one of them benefits from the resources and services that the South Dakota State Library and its staff provides thanks to state funding. Chief among those benefits are the approximately 50 online databases whose subscriptions are paid for with State Library funds. Access to these databases is free of charge to all public and school libraries in our state, regardless of whether they are located in Sioux Falls or Sturgis, Bison or Beresford.

They provide a vast array of information to users: educational research, recreational reading and viewing, historical data, job training, financial literacy, public records, art, music and language resources, consumer information — the list goes on and on. With these digital resources, you can write a school term paper, study for your driver’s license or the college SAT, learn the basics of starting a small business, find simple legal forms, research your family’s genealogy — or even find the best new dishwasher. In other words, if you have a question, the State Library probably has an electronic database that can help you find the answer.

A recently retired middle school librarian I know is aghast at how the loss of database access will affect public schools. It would gut the educational resources that she used regularly to teach her students.

Subscriptions to these databases are not cheap. With an annual budget of about $4 million, my library can afford to purchase some of its own database subscriptions, supplementing the state list with another 25 subscriptions that it pays for out of its own budget — including my beloved Consumer Reports.

But most South Dakota libraries are small, with small budgets, says Tina Hamlin, director of the Hyde County Library in Highmore. I grew up in that library, back when it was open all day and on Saturdays, too. With an annual budget of about $80,000, it’s all Hamlin can do to keep the library doors open 25 hours a week now. The library’s card catalog is still maintained by hand, not computer, and there’s no room in her limited budget for any database subscriptions. Even the library’s website, where patrons currently access these databases, was created with funding and tech support from the State Library, so she also worries about paying to maintain that in the future.

If the State Library staff is slashed, Hamlin will miss the trainings and resources that jumpstart the children’s reading program each summer. But the biggest impact could be losing access to the interlibrary loan services that the state staff coordinates through its Share It program. “We can request any book that a reader wants, as long as it’s not a brand new copyright,” Hamlin said.

Highmore readers borrow about 70 books per year through interlibrary loan, she estimates. That saves the library the cost of adding those requested books to its own collection, especially if they are of limited interest.

Larger libraries, which move hundreds of books each month through interlibrary loan, will face huge increases in postage costs if the courier service paid for by the State Library ends.

I assume that the State Library, like every government agency, has some fat in its budget. Some of its databases may not be used enough to justify their expense, and an annual review of those subscriptions is a good idea. But to gut the staff and budget of an agency that does so much to support these essential communal spaces throughout South Dakota seems cruel to me.

Public libraries are on the frontlines of many social issues today, from childcare shortages to homelessness to mental health challenges to rural isolation. They deserve more taxpayer support, not less. What does it say about a state that can find $825 million, ready and waiting in a fund, to pay for a new prison, but is too short-sighted to spend $1 million to keep information, education and entertainment available to all of its citizens through libraries? It says, sadly, get ready to fund even more prisons in the future.

As Gov. Noem exits state government soon for national duties, the South Dakota Legislature and its new governor should re-evaluate this unwise policy decision.

Photo: The library at Lakota Tech High School on the Pine Ridge Reservation. (John Hult/South Dakota Searchlight).

This South Dakota Searchlight article is republished online under  Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. 

Related post

•  Noem's proposed SD State Library budget cut would hamstring local libraries, opponents say

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Native activist Leonard Peltier to serve remainder of sentence at home after Biden order

From the North Dakota Monitor.

Native activist Leonard Peltier to serve remainder of sentence at home after Biden order
by Jeff Beach

President Joe Biden on Monday commuted the sentence of Leonard Peltier, a Native American activist convicted of killing two FBI agents nearly 50 years ago in South Dakota. 

Peltier, 80, is a citizen of the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa in North Dakota.  

Biden’s order as he leaves office is to take effect Feb. 18. A statement from Biden said Peltier should serve the remainder of his life sentence at home.  

NDN Collective, an Indigenous rights organization in Rapid City, South Dakota, issued a news release Monday celebrating Peltier’s commutation. The release included a quote attributed to Peltier: “It’s finally over – I’m going home. I want to show the world I’m a good person with a good heart. I want to help the people, just like my grandmother taught me.”

Peltier’s sister, Betty Ann Peltier, welcomed the news. 

“I am going to cook him the biggest meal I can,” she said. “Fry bread and foods he hasn’t eaten for years.” 

She said her brother is suffering from the effects of diabetes, has heart trouble and uses a walker. 

She said there has been a home waiting for him on the Turtle Mountain Reservation but that she hopes he will stay with her in Fargo. 

She had yet to communicate with her brother as of Monday morning. 

According to the FBI, in 1975, agents Ron Williams and Jack Coler were attempting to arrest a robbery suspect on the Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota. The agents pursued a vehicle, with Peltier among the people inside. A fatal shootout ensued, with the two agents and Joseph Stuntz, a member of the American Indian Movement, killed. Peltier has maintained that he is innocent.

South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley said in a statement his office strongly opposes any change to Peltier’s sentence, calling the deaths of the agents “cold-blooded murders.”

“That conviction has been reviewed and upheld by no fewer than 22 federal judges since then,” Jackley said Monday.

Tracey Wilkie of Fargo grew up on the Turtle Mountain Reservation and said she was raised hearing the story of Leonard Peltier. 

She called herself a “lifetime supporter and organizer for his freedom.” She helped lead a rally for Peltier last year when he was up for parole, which was denied.

The rally was on the steps of the federal courthouse in Fargo where Peltier was convicted. 

“So many people have been working behind the scenes,” Wilkie said. “It’s going to give a lot of people hope.” 

Peltier has been serving two consecutive life terms in prison, most recently in Florida. 

According to Biden’s statement, tribal Nations, Nobel Peace laureates, former law enforcement officials — including the former U.S. Attorney whose office oversaw Peltier’s prosecution and appeal — and human rights organizations support granting Peltier clemency. They cite Peltier’s advanced age, illnesses, his close ties to and leadership in the Native American community, and the substantial length of time he has already spent in prison.

A statement from the White House indicates that Biden’s action does not pardon Peltier from his crimes, but will allow him to spend his remaining days at home. 

State Rep. Jayme Davis, D-Rolette, a Turtle Mountain citizen, is among Peltier’s supporters. She said her father attended school in Belcourt with Peltier.

“It’s fabulous,” Davis said from the North Dakota legislative session in Bismarck after hearing the news. “I was in committee when I heard the news and almost screamed out loud.” 

Nick Tilsen, founder and CEO of NDN Collective, credited “50 years of intergenerational resistance, organizing and advocacy” for winning the commutation.

“Leonard Peltier’s liberation is our liberation – we will honor him by bringing him back to his homelands to live out the rest of his days surrounded by loved ones, healing, and reconnecting with his land and culture,” Tilsen said.

This story has been updated with reaction. North Dakota Monitor reporter Mary Steurer and South Dakota Searchlight staff contributed to this report.

Photo:  A prayer for Leonard Peltier is sung to a drumbeat on June 20, 2024, outside the federal courthouse in Fargo, North Dakota. Demonstrators were calling for the release of Peltier, who was convicted at a trial in Fargo in the deaths of FBI agents in South Dakota in 1975. (Jeff Beach/North Dakota Monitor).

This North Dakota Monitor article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. 

Related posts

• Rise Up For Peltier: South Dakotans rally in Fargo and Rapid City for Leonard Peltier
• Speakers in Mankato's Reconciliation Park lament the imprisonment of Leonard Peltier
• President Biden: Honor Desmond Tutu by releasing political prisoner Leonard Peltier

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Trump officials outline planned immigration crackdown, with Noem in key role

Some national news with a South Dakota twist.

A States Newsroom article as published in the South Dakota Searchlight.

Trump officials outline planned immigration crackdown, with Noem in key role
by Ariana Figueroa

WASHINGTON — Shortly after being inaugurated as the 47th president, Donald Trump is expected to sign 10 executive orders that will begin his immigration crackdown at the southern border, incoming Trump officials said during a call with reporters early Monday.

The first order is likely to be a declaration of a national emergency at the southern border, officials said. The specifics of the orders were not yet available on Monday morning.

“What this action does is it deploys armed forces, erect physical barriers by directing (Department of Defense) and (Department of Homeland Security) secretaries to finish the wall along the border, and allows for counter (Unmanned Aircraft System) capabilities near the southern borders,” an incoming Trump official said, speaking on background. “In addition, specifically, it directs the secretary of defense to deploy additional personnel to the border crisis, including members of the armed forces and the National Guard.”

Trump’s pick to carry out his immigration plans, South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem, completed her confirmation hearing last week and is likely to get a vote in the Senate in the coming days.

Trump’s pick for defense secretary, Fox News personality Pete Hegseth, was grilled by Senate Democrats during his confirmation hearing, but is considered likely to be approved by Republicans when his nomination is brought to the floor.

Additionally, the executive orders will clarify the U.S. military’s role in protecting U.S. territory, the Trump official said.

“What this action does is it assigns the mission to seal our borders and institutes campaign planning requirements for the military,” the official said. “The executive order directs the military to prioritize our borders and territorial integrity and strategic planning for its operations to maintain sovereignty, territory integrity and security of the U.S against all forms of invasion, including unlawful mass migration, narcotic trafficking, human smuggling, attacking and other criminal activities.”

Some of the incoming administration’s actions are likely to face immediate legal challenges. Officials said they plan to move to end asylum — something that is in U.S. law — as well as birthright citizenship, which is guaranteed in the 14th Amendment and affirmed in an 1898 U.S. Supreme Court case. 

“The federal government will not recognize automatic birthright citizenship for children of illegal aliens born in the United States,” a Trump official said. 

Some of the executive orders outlined Monday would reinstate policies from the first Trump administration such as the so-called Remain in Mexico policy.

Under that order, asylum seekers were required to remain in Mexico — often in dangerous circumstances — while their asylum cases were pending in the courts, something that can take months or even years.

Another order would reinstate a ban on so-called “catch and release,” which allows migrants who are detained to live in U.S. communities while they await having their asylum cases heard by an immigration judge.

One of the executive orders will also designate cartel groups as global terrorists.

Another will suspend refugee resettlement operations for at least four months.

Another will direct the attorney general to pursue capital punishment — the death penalty — for the murder of law enforcement officials and capital crimes committed by people in the country without legal authorization.

“This is about public safety, and this is about the victims of some of the most violent, abusive criminals we’ve seen enter our country in our lifetime,” the Trump official said. “And it ends today.”

Last updated 12:00 p.m., Jan. 20, 2025

South Dakota Searchlight is part of States Newsroom.

Photo: South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem. (Courtesy of Governor's Office). Trump’s pick to carry out his immigration plans, South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem, completed her confirmation hearing last week and is likely to get a vote in the Senate in the coming day.

This South Dakota Searchlight article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. 

Related posts

• [VIDEO] Noem pledges to secure border as DHS chief, will shut down mobile app for migrants 
• Governor Noem bids farewell and thank you to South Dakota in State of the State address
• South Dakota Legislature: Property taxes, ethanol carbon pipelines, prisons (and more)
• Good-bye girl: Trump picks Governor Kristi Noem as head of Homeland Security
• Commentary: SD Governor Kristi Noem rides back to D.C., possibly eyeing a bigger prize
• ‘School choice’ would force bad budget choices on state of South Dakota and school districts 
• Commentary: Attorney general and others know: Noem’s SDPB cut threatens public safety
• Noem's proposed SD State Library budget cut would hamstring local libraries, opponents say
• Proposed funding cut could sink network in as little as two years, SDPB director says 
• [VIDEO] Noem budget includes cuts; also new school-choice program & more prison money

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Hundreds pack SD PUC Summit ethanol carbon pipeline hearings in Watertown and Aberdeen

On Thursday, I'd posted  100s attend first day of SD PUC ethanol carbon pipeline meetings in Mitchell and Sioux Falls.

I'd hoped to attend the South Dakota PUC meeting on the Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline on Friday in Aberdeen, but stayed home with a cold.

Fortunately, there's fine coverage of Thursday's meeting in Watertown and Friday's event in Aberdeen. It seems the opposition to the pipeline isn't being silent.

In the Watertown Current, Roger Whittle reported in Summit pipeline meeting draws big crowd in Watertown:

A public input meeting on the proposed CO2 pipeline by Summit Carbon Solutions drew a large crowd Thursday, Jan. 16, to the Heritage Theater at the Watertown Event Center.

The Heritage Theater has 284 seats, and the vast majority of them were filled, with dozens more people standing in the back and along the sides of the room.

The meeting was organized by the South Dakota Public Utilities Commission, one of several such gatherings about the project. All three PUC commissioners were present, along with staff members. 

A group of executives from Summit Carbon Solutions was on hand to provide information and answer questions.

Following Summit’s 20-minute overview of the project, all audience members were given the opportunity to address the PUC, Summit officials and the audience. Thirty-five people spoke, with each given a four-minute time limit.

But despite the company’s pitch, the majority of the 35 audience members who addressed the crowd were critical of the pipeline and urged the PUC to reject the Summit proposal. . . .

Reporting for South Dakota Public Broadcasting, Evan Walton reported in Hundreds gather in Watertown to talk CO2 pipeline at PUC meeting:

Summit Carbon Solutions is trying to soothe concerns over a proposed CO2 pipeline in a series public input meetings.

But some are still not convinced by the company’s promises.

Hundreds gathered for the Watertown meeting Thursday evening, one of several arranged by the South Dakota Public Utilities Commission to discuss the pipeline.

The project aims to capture carbon from ethanol plants and sequester it underground in North Dakota. Summit’s first application with the PUC was denied. Part of the PUC’s reasoning was due to the proposed pipeline route conflicting with local ordinances mandating minimum set back distances. . . .

On Friday, the Aberdeen Insider's Scott Waldman reported in Hundreds gather in Aberdeen as PUC hears feedback about Summit pipeline plan:

No means no not only on a date, but when it comes to a proposed carbon capture pipeline planned to cross parts of eastern South Dakota.

That was the comparison Lanette Butler of McPherson County made during a state Public Utilities Commission meeting on Friday, Jan. 17 at the Dakota Event Center in Aberdeen. The session was to gather feedback about Summit Carbon Solutions‘ pipeline plan.

The no-means-no-theme was a prime one during the meeting, which was attended by roughly 300 people.

Based on comments, applause and an informal survey, a strong majority were opposed to the pipeline plan. But, the audience also heard about the potential benefits of the project during a presentation given by Summit officials to open the meeting. Others in favor of the line also spoke during the three-hour gathering, which remained civil, though there were law officers on hand. . . .

Opponents touched on many concerns that have been raised in the past, including safety, the use of eminent domain by a for-profit business, how Summit has interacted with landowners and whether the company has to adhere to local laws and regulations such as county setback requirements.

‘Summit does not comply, please deny’

“Summit does not comply, please deny,” said Kim Hoffman of McPherson County.

Others used some variation of the catchy phrase as they spoke against the pipeline.

Opponents also mentioned how voters in November rejected Senate Bill 201/Referred Law 21. The bill was approved during the 2024 legislative session and signed into law by Gov. Kristi Noem before being referred to a statewide vote.

The so-called “Landowner Bill of Rights” set out some benefits for landowners, but not nearly enough, according to those who don’t want to see the pipeline proceed. . . .

Read all three articled at the links.

Photo: South Dakota Public Utilities Commission Watertown Public Input meeting. Photo by Evan Walton, SDPB.

Related posts

• 100s attend first day of SD PUC ethanol carbon pipeline meetings in Mitchell and Sioux Falls
• Federal regulators announce proposed rule for CO2 pipeline safety
• Carbon pipeline opponents rallied Monday in Pierre amid push for eminent domain ban
• North Dakota landowners appeal Summit ethanol carbon storage decision 
• Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline company formally asks SD regulator to recuse herself 
• South Dakota Public Utilities Commissioner stays on new carbon pipeline case after prior recusal, with no explanation this time
• Punt! Lincoln County commissioners push back decision on ethanol carbon pipeline rules
• Summit Carbon Solutions in the news: landowners & counties appeal North Dakota pipeline permit; Summit tells Iowans to cease & desist; Pipeline Fighters Hub & CURE statements
• North Dakota Industrial Commission approves CO2 storage for Summit ethanol carbon pipeline
• Minnesota PUC granted a permit for Summit Carbon Solutions Otter Tail to Wilkin County pipeline
• South Dakota Public Utilities Commission schedules public input meetings on Summit carbon pipeline application
• Summit ethanol CO2 injection wells up for approval but court appeal already in the works
• Oh the irony: ethanol carbon pipeline company has failed to address crossing concerns, DAPL oil pipeline company says
• Iowa Supreme Court upholds land survey abilities of pipeline companies in Summit case
• U.S. appeals court hears Summit pipeline case against Iowa's Shelby and Story counties
• Never mind the voters: ethanol carbon pipeline company reapplies for South Dakota permit
• Summit ethanol carbon pipeline news digest: Summit sues another Iowa county and more!
• North Dakota Public Service Commission approves Summit carbon pipeline route
• North Dakota couple plans to ‘dig in’ if Summit ethanol carbon pipeline is approved
• Summit ethanol carbon pipeline news digest: CO2 pipeline in MN moves forward; ND Public Service Commission decision coming Friday
• SD pipeline foes secure legislative leadership; MN Summit decision could come Dec. 12
• In unofficial results, ethanol carbon-pipeline law tossed out by South Dakota voters 
• CURE: MN Administrative Law Judge’s report on Summit’s CO 2 pipeline expected November 4
• Seven South Dakota ballot measures, $7 million and counting: Reports reveal total spending
• Jeepers: ethanol coop kicks in another $400,000 to support carbon pipeline ballot question 
• Ethanol carbon news digest: Summit Carbon pipeline in MN, Iowa & North Dakota media
• Summit Carbon Solutions CEO asks for prayer, while MN PUC wants public comment on FEIS of Otter Tail – Wilkin portion of CO2 Pipeline
• Public can comment on Otter Tail – Wilkin Co section of ethanol carbon pipeline until Sept. 11
• VIDEO: Carbon capture in Minnesota: public lands, fast money, and pipe dreams
• Summit pipeline segment enters final permitting stages in Minnesota; CURE raises objections
• Ethanol is fueling support of South Dakota carbon pipeline ballot measure
• Pipeline Fighters Hub: Summit Carbon Solutions numbers don’t add up in South Dakota 
• Referred Law 21 & carbon pipelines: A landowner bill of rights or an undermining of local control
• Summit Carbon Solution's ethanol carbon pipeline takes #2 spot on Heatmap's The Most At-Risk Projects of The Energy Transition 
• Ethanol carbon pipeline news: Attorneys differ on meaning of common carrier law in Summit case
• Summit Carbon Solutions pipelines won’t capture all carbon emitted by ethanol plants
• South Dakota Supreme Court ruling complicates Summit Carbon Solution’s push for land
• Referred pipeline law puts Summit Carbon Solution's permit quest in limbo
• Breaking crowded South Dakota ballot news: carbon pipeline law referendum validated
• Sustainable jet fuel company Gevo contributes $167K in defense of carbon pipeline law
• South Dakota Property Rights and Local Control Alliance turns in petitions to SD Secretary of State to force a vote on carbon pipeline policy
• South Dakota District 1 GOP House primary news round-up: carbon pipeline politics major issue
• New Midwest battles brew over CO2 pipelines

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Education Government Tuition freeze is thawing: Tight budget could drive SD college costs up

Last month, I'd republished a South Dakota Searchlight article, Noem’s budget cut would raise dual credit costs for ambitious high school students & families, that detailed one means by which the governor would increase college costs for South Dakota students and their families.

(For Minnesota readers, South Dakota's dual-credit program is similar to the North Star State's Postsecondary Enrollment Options (PSEO).

Now the Spotlight's Makenzie Huber takes on another way in which college may end up costing more for South Dakotans.

From the South Dakota Searchlight.

Tuition freeze is thawing: Tight budget could drive SD college costs up after years of relief
by Makenzie Huber

South Dakota’s era of public university tuition freezes is likely coming to an end.

Students have benefited from three consecutive tuition freezes supported by the Legislature. The state Board of Regents absorbed some cost increases during that time and years prior to hold the line on tuition and fees, Executive Director Nathan Lukkes told lawmakers Thursday during a Senate Education Committee at the Capitol in Pierre.

The university system is not requesting any increases to its budget this year, acknowledging the state’s lower-than-anticipated revenue. Gov. Kristi Noem proposed cutting the system’s funding by roughly $11 million, including a $2 million operational cut and a $9 million cut to the system’s building maintenance fund. 

“We’re hoping not to lose anymore than we have to,” Lukkes said.

South Dakota has created a “competitive advantage” with the most affordable college costs compared to surrounding states, Lukkes said, based on the total cost for an in-state undergraduate degree. The total cost in South Dakota increased 5.2% in the last five years, while costs in neighboring states went up by 11.1% or more.

A presentation slide compares South Dakota undergraduate costs to surrounding states from 2021 through 2025. (Courtesy of South Dakota Board of Regents)

That’s primarily due to efforts by the Legislature and the system to keep tuition rates flat, including tuition freezes and work to trim redundancies in the system and cut under-attended classes and programs since 2021.

“It was tough,” Lukkes said, “but it was the right thing to do.”

Montana has the closest undergraduate costs to South Dakota this year, about $100 more than a South Dakota in-state degree, but an 18% increase since 2021.

Regental spokeswoman Shuree Mortenson said the system will watch how the fiscal year 2026 budget develops over the legislative session to plan and discuss potential tuition and fee increases for the next school year. That discussion will happen during the board’s April meeting.

“We will continue to be mindful of our current and future students and will do our best to minimize any potential increases,” Mortenson said in an emailed statement.

Public university enrollment is increasing, due to efforts to recruit in-state and out-of-state students. As the number of college-age students decreases nationwide because of lower population numbers, Lukkes said, universities will have to be “increasingly competitive” to attract students within the state and across the country.

Last fall, Lukkes touted the state’s low tuition rate compared to surrounding states to the Government Operations and Audit Committee. But he told lawmakers at the time that South Dakota falls behind once income-based financial aid programs are factored in. Those programs are more robust in other states.

A 15% increase in funding for South Dakota’s Opportunity Scholarship in 2023 and the launch of the Freedom Scholarship in 2022 have helped improve the options for students with lower incomes.

“Even though we’ve gotten a lot better, we’re way behind the competition,” Lukkes said at the time.

Photo: South Dakota Board of Regents Executive Director Nathan Lukkes presents to the House Education Committee during the 2024 legislative session. (Makenzie Huber/South Dakota Searchlight).

This South Dakota Searchlight article is republished online under  Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

Related posts

• Noem’s budget cut would raise dual credit costs for ambitious high school students & families
• Noem's proposed SD State Library budget cut would hamstring local libraries, opponents say
• Proposed funding cut could sink network in as little as two years, SDPB director says 
• [VIDEO] Noem budget includes cuts; also new school-choice program & more prison money

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Heckova beginning: Two court decisions upend Minnesota legislative session

Thank goodness I'm committed to a creative project that requires understanding rural west central Minnesota politics and life around the time of the 1918 Republican primary, and that the Minnesota Reformer is able to cover the latest wrinkles in the 2025 Minnesota legislature.

From the Minnesota Reformer.

Two court decisions upend Minnesota legislative sessionby J. Patrick Coolican

A pair of high-stakes judicial decisions will shape the next few weeks of the already messy Minnesota legislative session, including a delayed special election to determine control of the House, and a delayed criminal trial that threatens to dominate the proceedings of the Senate.

The Minnesota Supreme Court canceled a special election in House District 40B that had been called by Gov. Tim Walz for Jan. 28, ruling that Walz wrongly called for the election on Dec. 27 even though the law required him to wait until until after the beginning of the legislative session on Tuesday.

Walz called the election after Democrat Curtis Johnson resigned the seat when a judge ruled he didn’t live in the district he sought to represent.

The outcome is significant because Republicans currently hold a 1-vote advantage in the House, 67-66, and the special election in the heavily Democratic north metro district is expected to bring the House to 67-67, necessitating a power-sharing agreement.

Democrats have thus far boycotted GOP-led House proceedings in an effort to deny a quorum, which is the minimum number of members that must be present to conduct business. The two sides will make oral arguments at the Supreme Court next week.

The delayed special election will force Democrats to hold out longer, exposing them to attacks from Republicans that they aren’t showing up for work.

Separately, a judge granted state Sen. Nicole Mitchell’s request to delay her criminal trial until after the legislative session. The Woodbury Democrat pleaded not guilty in August after she was charged with felony burglary for allegedly breaking into her stepmother’s Detroit Lakes home in April.

Her lawyers cited a Minnesota law and 2007 appellate ruling stating that legal proceedings involving legislators should be delayed until after the legislative session.

Becker County District Judge Michael Fritz granted the motion, ruling that “if a legislator is forced to stand trial during the legislative session, their constituents would be without a voice during that session.”

Republicans signaled they will turn up the heat on Democrats if they continue to allow Mitchell to vote.

Sen. Mark Johnson, R-East Grand Forks, called Mitchell’s request “an abuse of her status as a senator.” The Republican leader added: “This is not a victimless crime; this delay revictimized those involved, and Senate Republicans will not stand idly by while Sen. Mitchell abuses her position to deny justice.”

The Senate is currently tied 33-33, but a special election Jan. 28 in a northeast Minneapolis district is expected to give Democrats a one-seat majority. The two parties have worked out a power-sharing agreement until then.

Democrats have sought to isolate Mitchell, stripping her of committee assignments and barring her from their caucus meetings. Leading Democrats, including Walz, have encouraged her to resign. Thus far, Senate Democratic leader Sen. Erin Murphy has argued Mitchell deserves due process before the Senate considers expulsion.

The trial delay may have Democrats reconsidering.

Photo: 

This Minnesota Reformer article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

Related posts

• The ghost of Joe Rolette: DFL walkout at the MN State Legislature isn’t without precedent 
• Minnesota leads again: No other state has ever begun legislative session without clear majorities
• [VIDEO] Session Daily: MNHouse Republicans plan to act as majority, DFL threatens Opening Day absence in power sharing tug-of-war
• DFL Sen. Kari Dziedzic, former MN Senate Majority Leader, dies of cancer at 62
• After Johnson drops notion of appeal, MNHouse 40B special election scheduled for Jan. 28, 2025
• GOP wins MN House majority, for now, after judge rules District 40B DFL candidate ineligible
• Republicans seek Minnesota House majority through two legal challenges
• Dancing in the dark? MNHouse DFL and GOP, tied at 67, locked in a haters’ embrace

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

[VIDEO] Noem pledges to secure border as DHS chief, will shut down mobile app for migrants

I had hoped to go to Aberdeen this morning for a PUC meeting on the Summit carbon pipelines, but a lingering cold and ultra-windy weather discouraged the trip.

Instead, I watched Governor Noem testify before the U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs as part of the process to confirm her nomination as Department of Homeland Security.

Here's the YouTube of the PBSNews Hour of the hearing:

From the States Newsroom, via South Dakota Searchlight

Noem pledges to secure border as DHS chief, will shut down mobile app for migrants
by Ariana Figueroa

WASHINGTON — South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem told members of the U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Friday that she will be “vigilant and proactive and innovative to protect the homeland” as she carries out President-elect Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown.

“The challenges in front of us are extremely significant, and we must secure our borders against illegal trafficking and immigration,” Noem, Trump’s nominee for DHS secretary, said in her opening statement. She said she will get rid of a mobile app used by migrants to make appointments with asylum officers to plead their cases that’s been criticized by Republicans.

Noem’s nomination hearing was one of the last before Monday’s Inauguration Day. Most were tame, save for the hearing for the Defense secretary nominee, Fox News personality Pete Hegseth. Most nominees appeared on their way to easy confirmations in the GOP-controlled Senate.

Senators this week held hearings for U.S. attorney general pick Pam Bondi of Florida; Office of Management and Budget nominee Russ Vought; former North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum, nominated as Interior secretary; Department of Housing and Urban Development nominee Eric Scott Turner; and Scott Bessent, a hedge fund manager tapped to run the Treasury Department. 

South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem’s advancement to the cusp of confirmation as a Trump cabinet secretary probably surprised some people who thought her career ended nine months ago with a notoriously disastrous book release.

It’s no surprise to Noem, who’s been thwarting predictions of her demise since her first statewide race 15 years ago.

Noem’s hearing was mainly friendly, with Democrats concerned about the U.S.-Canada border, assistance for natural disasters, cybersecurity and domestic terrorism.

The top Democrat on the committee, Sen. Gary Peters of Michigan, asked Noem about domestic terrorism and how she would address it, pointing to the recent terrorist attack in New Orleans, Louisiana.

Noem said that the number one threat to the U.S. is immigration at the southern border, but noted that “homegrown terrorism is on the rise.”

Senate Republicans, such as the chair of the committee, Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, heavily focused on border security and reimplementation of Trump-era immigration policies, as well as curtailing humanitarian parole and temporary legal immigration programs like Temporary Protected Status.

McCook Lake flooding

Noem said that she would draw on her experience as South Dakota’s governor if she is confirmed as DHS secretary. Some of that includes cybersecurity and the management of natural disasters, such as the recent June flooding in her state that affected McCook Lake property owners.

However, the state of South Dakota received notice that it could be sued by those property owners, who argue their community suffered catastrophic damage as a direct result of flood diversion efforts carried out by state and local officials. Residents said they were not properly warned about the flooding by officials, especially by Noem, who conducted a press conference prior to the flood but then flew out of state for a political fundraiser in Tennessee while the flood was occurring.

Peters, while not mentioning McCook Lake, pointed out DHS is often the first line of defense when it comes to natural disasters.

“The Federal Emergency Management Agency must continue to work hard to address the increasing number of natural disasters affecting our communities as a result of climate change,” Peters said, “from violent storms like hurricanes that brought destruction to states across the South to the devastating wildfires in California and countless other severe storms and flooding events all across our country.”

Congress recently included $100 billion in disaster aid in a stopgap spending bill in December.

Democratic Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut said he was deeply disappointed with Trump’s response to the fires in California, and noted that during the first Trump administration, requests for disaster aid from Washington state and other blue states were brushed off.

Noem said that under her leadership “at the Department of Homeland Security there will be no political bias to how disaster relief is delivered to the American people.”

Blumenthal asked her if she would follow Trump’s orders to withhold disaster assistance to blue states, noting the $100 billion in funds Congress recently passed. 

Noem said she would not answer a question about a hypothetical scenario.

“It’s more than a hypothetical, with all due respect,” Blumenthal said. “It’s based on experience with President Trump withholding money from Washington state and elsewhere. I need to know from you, will you stand up to the president?”

Noem said that she will “deliver the programs according to the law.”

Resignation, divestment

In Noem’s ethics agreement, she noted she plans to resign as South Dakota’s governor as soon as she’s confirmed as Trump’s DHS secretary, something that could happen as soon as next week.

She added that she plans to divest from a company where she is a manager, Ashwood Strategies LLC.

As part of her financial disclosure to the U.S. Office of Government Ethics, Noem said she made almost $140,000 in a book advance for a 2024 memoir where she admitted to shooting and killing her 14-month-old dog, Cricket, due to behavioral issues. The revelation drew bipartisan backlash, but she’s mainly defended it.

She also received about $40,000 for an advance for her first book, published in 2022, “Not My First Rodeo: Lessons from the Heartland.”

As part of the disclosure, she said her husband makes a little over $1 million at his insurance firm. It is noted in the form that he is the sole owner. 

Northern border

Peters also said DHS does not have enough resources at the northern border to facilitate trade. He added that there has been an increase in unauthorized crossings.

Noem said that in addition to focusing on the southern border, her goal is to have the northern border properly staffed, for both trade and security.

Sen. Maggie Hassan, Democrat of New Hampshire, said in her state she has seen an increase in unauthorized crossings.

“There’s real concern in New Hampshire and all along the northern border that we strengthen the border and have the resources we need,” Hassan said. “We also have a really strong economic relationship with our partner, our friends to the north, and a lot of family relationships. We don’t want to impede that flow of economy and people that’s lawful, but we do want to make sure that we have the resources we need.”

She asked if Noem would consider upgrading the equipment at the northern border, along with more staff.

“That’s something I want to work with Congress, with the Senate and the House on, to ensure that the resources are there to meet the challenges at the border,” Noem said.

Biden immigration policies

GOP Sens. Josh Hawley of Missouri and James Lankford of Oklahoma said they want DHS to roll back several Biden-era immigration policies, such as the use of the mobile app by migrants and humanitarian parole.

Noem said if she’s confirmed, the shutdown of what’s known as the CBP One app will be one of her first directives, and while the app will be gone, she said DHS will preserve the data. Noem said she doesn’t believe the tool should be used to process asylum seekers into the country.

Trump’s Vice President, Ohio’s J.D. Vance, has also criticized the use of the app, writing on social media that the use of the app is “the most underreported scandal of the Biden admin.”

“They made an application to facilitate illegal immigration,” he said. “It boggles the mind.”

Lankford also asked if construction of the border wall would continue, and Noem said it would.

Hawley asked if Noem would work to reinstate the so-called Remain in Mexico policy, which requires asylum seekers to often stay in dangerous parts of Mexico and wait while their asylum cases are pending, something that can take months or years.

“The president and I have talked extensively about this, and (I) will 100% partner with him to reinstate the Remain in Mexico policy and make sure that it’s in place,” she said.

Noem added that she also wants to increase the number of immigration judges and courts. However, the Department of Justice holds jurisdiction over immigration courts, not DHS.

Ohio freshman GOP Sen. Bernie Moreno asked about Temporary Protected Status, which allows people to remain in the United States and work temporarily if their home country is deemed too dangerous for return due to war, natural disasters or violence. There are roughly 1 million people in the TPS program, which does not provide a pathway to citizenship and typically has to be reauthorized every 18 months or so.

“This program has been abused and manipulated by the Biden administration, and that will no longer be allowed,” Noem said.

There are 17 countries under TPS, such as Ukraine, Afghanistan, Sudan, El Salvador and Venezuela.

The White House this month redesignated TPS for Ukraine, Venezuela, Sudan and El Salvador. Of those redesignations, Noem said she specifically disagreed with the one for Venezuela.

During Trump’s first term, he tried to end the TPS designation for Haiti, Nicaragua, El Salvador and Sudan, but was blocked by the courts in 2018.

Mass deportations

Freshman Democratic Sens. Andy Kim of New Jersey and Ruben Gallego of Arizona, both former House lawmakers, pressed Noem on how she would carry out mass deportations of people in the country without legal status. 

Kim asked what kind of authority border czar Tom Homan would have in immigration policy and if Homan would be giving direct orders to Immigration and Customs Enforcement or U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.

“If he is going to be making decisions, then he should come before this committee as well,” Kim said.

Noem said that she would be working with Homan daily and that “there’s no authorities being planned to be taken away from the department or myself in the role.”

“But it sends some mixed signals,” Kim said. “People in my home state, maybe around the country, when they hear Mr. Homan saying, ‘I’m making the decisions,’ when they hear President-elect Trump say ‘He’s in charge of our border.’”

Gallego asked Noem what her plan was to ensure there is a safe and legal process for agricultural workers, who he said are concerned about what Trump’s mass deportations plans could mean for them.

“You know, talking to my agricultural community, my dairy community, they have concerns that this approach will lead to workforce shortages that will further drive up the costs of everything,” Gallego said.

Noem said that Trump “has been very clear that his priority is going to be deporting criminals, those who have broken our laws and perpetuated violence in our communities.”

She added that his next priority for deportations will be those who have removal orders.

Iowa GOP Sen. Joni Ernst also asked Noem how she plans to detain immigrants, and not allow those who have been charged with a crime to be allowed bond.

“The number one priority of the president is to secure the border and to deport these criminal actors immediately and as soon as possible. They will be the number one priority to make our communities safer and so that we don’t have this kind of situation going forward,” Noem said.

Separately, the U.S. Senate early Friday also voted on a bipartisan basis to move forward with a bill that would greatly expand mass detention of immigrants arrested or charged with a property crime.

The measure was written in response to the murder of a 22-year-old nursing student, Laken Riley, in Georgia. A man from Venezuela who was in the U.S. without proper authorization has been convicted of the crime.

Photo: South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem delivers her 2025 State of the State address to lawmakers at the Capitol in Pierre on Jan. 14, 2025. (Joshua Haiar/South Dakota Searchlight).

This States Newroom/South Dakota Searchlight article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

Related posts

• Governor Noem bids farewell and thank you to South Dakota in State of the State address
• South Dakota Legislature: Property taxes, ethanol carbon pipelines, prisons (and more)
• Good-bye girl: Trump picks Governor Kristi Noem as head of Homeland Security
• Commentary: SD Governor Kristi Noem rides back to D.C., possibly eyeing a bigger prize
• ‘School choice’ would force bad budget choices on state of South Dakota and school districts 
• Commentary: Attorney general and others know: Noem’s SDPB cut threatens public safety
• Noem's proposed SD State Library budget cut would hamstring local libraries, opponents say
• Proposed funding cut could sink network in as little as two years, SDPB director says 
• [VIDEO] Noem budget includes cuts; also new school-choice program & more prison money

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Ag-Gag 2.0: SDLeg bill to protect farms from spying could limit access to CAFO data

Back in another decade, ag-gag legislation was an unsuccessful thing in Minnesota, as I reported in 2011's  Hamilton on "Ag Gag" bill: whistleblowers taping animal abuse "just as guilty" of abuse as abuser; 2013's  Alarmed by wave of ag-gag bills, Winona Daily News condemns anti-whistleblower legislation, and 2015's  Back in news following Christensen Farms animal abuse allegation, ag-gag law bombed in 2011.

A new article from South Dakota News Watch's Bart Pfankuch demonstrates that the concept still stalks the hallowed halls of the South Dakota legislature (my state senator Michael Rohl is a co-sponsor). Who needs Hollywood for zombie thrills?

Bill to protect farms from spying could limit access to CAFO data
by Bart Pfankuch, South Dakota News Watch

Measure seeks to stop so-called agro-terrorists from entering or photographing South Dakota farms.

Proposed legislation aimed at protecting South Dakota farmers from potential "agro-terrorism" activities could have a secondary effect of limiting access to information about the state's largest animal feeding operations.

Senate Bill 14 seeks to strengthen a set of existing laws that make it a crime for anyone to steal farm animals, release animals, trespass on farms or interfere with farm operations.

As written, the bill also would add criminal penalties for using deception to enter or gain employment at an agricultural operation or to use cameras or other surveillance methods to spy on a farm or agricultural research facility. The bill also would make it a crime to interfere with or destroy crops or structures at farms and agricultural research facilities.

"Essentially, it's a property protection, property rights bill for farmers and ranchers," the bill's lead sponsor, Sen. Casey Crabtree (R-Madison), told News Watch.

The measure, Crabtree said, is similar to laws passed over roughly the past 15 years in Iowa that sought to prevent animal-rights activists or anyone else from entering or recording activities at farms in order to find evidence of possible animal mistreatment or abuse.

Dubbed "ag-gag" laws by opponents, the laws were challenged in court on First Amendment grounds. Despite some lower court rulings, the Iowa laws most similar to Crabtree's proposal were upheld as constitutional by a federal appeals court in 2024.

Crabtree said he hasn't heard of widespread efforts to infiltrate or interfere with South Dakota farm operations, but a mink farm in Arlington has experienced problems in the past.

Operators of that farm did not return a call seeking comment.

The intent of the bill is to stop "bad actors" from using deception or technology to possibly paint an unfair picture of what is happening on South Dakota farms, Crabtree said.

"We've got reports back about environmentalist groups that are attacking production facilities, or that they might be using drones and cameras, is really where this comes from," he said.

Ag groups push for Senate Bill 14

The drafting of SB 14 was aided by a number of farm groups that gathered last summer to identify ways to help agricultural producers in the 2025 legislative session, said Matthew Bogue, public policy director for the South Dakota Farm Bureau Federation.

South Dakota farmers deserve protection from anyone who may have "intent to cause physical or economic harm" to a farmer or farm operation, he said.

State farm groups have heard concerns from producers that people could break into their farms or trespass with ill intent, Bogue said.

"It’s never a bad time to be proactive," he said. "In our opinion, this modernizes the existing statutes."

Bill would limit information on CAFOs

But the bill also would add a new section to state law that would make it more difficult for the public, the press and even local governments from obtaining information about the state's largest animal operations.

Concentrated animal feeding operations, or CAFOs, are large livestock operations where several hundred or even tens of thousands of cattle, hogs, chickens and turkeys are fed within a single farm, often in enclosed structures.

CAFOs are heavily regulated in South Dakota, and operators must obtain a permit and undergo inspection of their operations and their records to ensure proper waste management and protection of water resources.

Section 6 in SB 14 would bar the state Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources – which oversees CAFO permitting and inspection – from releasing a list of permitted CAFOs and their locations in South Dakota to anyone unless required by federal law.

The bill also would provide DANR discretion on whether to release a list of CAFOs to any "South Dakota state agency or local government for information regarding a permitted operation in the jurisdiction of the agency or local government."

Crabtree said an individual or government entity could still obtain a list of CAFOs and their locations by making an in-person request at the offices of DANR in Pierre.

The restriction on obtaining information about CAFOs worries Jay Gilbertson, manager of the East Dakota Water Development District, which promotes conservation and management of water resources in eastern South Dakota.

The reason CAFOs are permitted in the first place is to maintain oversight of their operations and to allow for the state and others to ensure the large farms are not polluting the land and water, he said.

Restricting public access to CAFO permits could make it more likely that large livestock operators would cut corners or avoid expensive waste management or water protection systems without anyone knowing, Gilbertson said.

"The permits are pretty explicit and contain all sorts of things ‘thou shall or shan’t do,’ which makes it easy to adhere to because the operator knows exactly what is expected," he said.

"At the same time, if I’m somebody who is concerned about a facility, I can look at the permit requirements and it will tell me, 'This is exactly what is supposed to be going on.' And if it is, fine. But if it isn’t, there isn’t any debate that there’s a problem."

CAFOs expanding in South Dakota

State officials said CAFOs are generally well operated and follow state laws. But problems do occur and fines have been levied against permit violators.

According to prior research by News Watch, permitted CAFOs in South Dakota violated state regulations 217 times from October 2009 to August 2019. The state received, on average, about two complaints about CAFOS from the public each month, and animal wastes from CAFOs leaked into state waterways on nine occasions during that time period, according to state records.

The number of animals raised and fed in CAFOs has increased steadily over the past decade.

The state and lawmakers have taken steps in recent years to make it easier for development of CAFOs and harder for residents and local governments to fight them. The state also has offered financial incentives to livestock producers to expedite development of new CAFO operations.

Brian Walsh, deputy secretary of DANR, wrote in an email to News Watch that the department already denies release of CAFO information to some who request it.

"DANR reviews and considers each individual request for information on Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) as they are submitted. DANR has received requests for an aggregated listing of all CAFOs including specific location information (addresses, geographic coordinate systems locations, or legal locations) with the express purpose of sharing those locations online," Walsh wrote. "DANR has denied such requests in the past due to the issue of biosecurity and agro-terrorism risks. The bill as drafted would not change how DANR currently responds to requests for CAFO records requests."

But Gilbertson said it seems odd that language in the bill could prevent the public or local governments from knowing where CAFOs are located.

"The department (DANR) has the tools to allow people to look things up for all the permits they issue," he said. "But when it comes to animal feeding operations, if you really want to know, you have to go to Pierre, and try to get in the DANR building and dig through the paper files? That would just be silly."

This story was produced by South Dakota News Watch, an independent, nonprofit organization. Read more stories and donate at sdnewswatch.org and sign up for an email to get stories when they're published. Contact Bart Pfankuch at [email protected].

Photo: Hogs mill about in a pen at a concentrated animal feeding operation in Hand County in 2019. (Photo: Bart Pfankuch / South Dakota News Watch).

This article is republished with the permission of South Dakota News Watch.

Related posts

• Hamilton on "Ag Gag" bill: whistleblowers taping animal abuse "just as guilty" of abuse as abuser
• Worthington rumble over Hamilton "Ag-Gag" bill continues in Globe's letters section
• Alarmed by wave of ag-gag bills, Winona Daily News condemns anti-whistleblower legislation
• Back in news following Christensen Farms animal abuse allegation, ag-gag law bombed in 2011

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6