South Dakota
In rare bipartisan vote, U.S. Senate passes package aimed at protecting kids online • South Dakota Searchlight
This story mentions suicide. If you or a loved one are experiencing a mental health crisis or thoughts of suicide, please dial 988 or chat with a live counselor at 988lifeline.org.
WASHINGTON — Legislation aimed at protecting children online sailed through the U.S. Senate Tuesday, marking what could be the first update since the late 1990s for companies who interact with minors on the internet.
Senators approved the package of two bills in a 91-3 vote (including yes votes from South Dakota Republicans John Thune and Mike Rounds). It was a rare bipartisan landslide in the tightly divided body, despite loud and fervent opposition from civil liberties and LGBTQ organizations that say the measures would hand the government power to subjectively censor content.
The three no votes were cast by Mike Lee of Utah, Rand Paul of Kentucky and Ron Wyden of Oregon.
If passed by the House, the legislative package would require producers of platforms popular among children and teens to follow new rules governing advertising, algorithms and collection of personal data.
GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., has expressed interest in “working to find consensus in the House.”
President Joe Biden released a statement Tuesday calling the Senate vote a “crucial bipartisan step forward” and said the bill dovetails with measures he advocated for in his first State of the Union Address.
“There is undeniable evidence that social media and other online platforms contribute to our youth mental health crisis. Today our children are subjected to a wild west online and our current laws and regulations are insufficient to prevent this. It is past time to act,” Biden said, adding that tech companies need to be “accountable for the national experiment they are running on our children for profit.”
Families asked for federal help
The package contains two bills moving together: the Children and Teens Online Privacy Protection Act, which is mainly targeted at regulating the collection of personal data, and the Kids Online Safety Act, a bill that has been a lightning rod of criticism from outside groups.
A bipartisan group of senators points to years of hearings and meetings with tragedy-struck families — including those whose children struggled with eating disorders and died by suicide — as the motivation behind the proposals.
Sen. Marsha Blackburn, of Tennessee, one of the Kids Online Safety Act’s original sponsors, said the legislation is a “safety by design bill, a duty of care bill that gives kids and parents a toolbox so that they can protect themselves.”
“A message that we’re sending to big tech: kids are not your product, kids are not your profit source, and we are going to protect them in the virtual space,” Blackburn, a Republican, said at a press conference following the vote.
‘Firehose’ of information confronts legislators studying internet use by children and AI
Blackburn co-led the bill dubbed the Kids Online Safety Act with Democratic Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut.
Sen. Ed Markey, who championed the last protections passed by Congress in late 1990s, said “back in 1998 only birds tweeted, a gram was a measurement of weight, and so we need to update the law.”
The Massachusetts Democrat joined Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana in co-sponsoring the Children and Teens’ Online Privacy Protection Act.
Markey likened addictive social media products to those of the tobacco industry in previous decades, and cited public health warnings attributing increasing childhood mental health issues to the platforms.
“So we have to give the tools to parents and to teenagers and children to be able to protect themselves, and that would be my message to my colleagues in the House. We cannot avoid this historic moment,” Markey said at the press conference.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer praised the legislation’s passage in the Senate and said the parents of affected teens are “the reason we succeeded today.”
“I’ve heard the terrible stories: children, teenagers, perfectly normal, then some algorithm captures them online by accident, and they end up committing suicide shortly thereafter,” the New York Democrat said in a statement. “You imagine being a parent and living with that.”
New rules for platforms
The original two bills, rolled into one legislative vehicle, respectively outline “duty of care” rules requiring platform creators to consider broad mental health categories when designing and operating their products as well as a prohibition of the use of personal data for targeted marketing.
The legislation would also mandate that platforms create an “easy-to-understand privacy dashboard” detailing how a minor’s personal information is collected, used and protected.
Other measures would include a prohibition on hidden algorithms, mechanisms for minors or parents to remove data, parental controls to restrict financial transactions and annual public reports from the platforms on “reasonably foreseeable” harms to children and teens and efforts underway to prevent them.
Enforcement
The new policies, if enacted, would be enforced by the Federal Trade Commission and any civil actions would be prosecuted by states in U.S. district court with advance notice to the FTC.
The legislation defines the online platforms as public-facing websites, social media applications, video games, messaging applications or video streaming services that are “used, or reasonably likely to be used, by a minor.”
Snap, the company behind the popular platform Snapchat, issued a statement specifically praising the Senate’s passage of the Kids Online Safety Act.
“The safety and well-being of young people on Snapchat is a top priority,” a Snap spokesperson said in a statement provided to States Newsroom. “That’s why Snap has been a long-time supporter of the Kids Online Safety Act. We applaud Senators Blackburn, Blumenthal and the roughly 70 other co-sponsors of this critical legislation for their leadership and commitment to the privacy and safety of young people.”
Opponents see ‘dangerous’ measure
A coalition of organizations advocating for First Amendment rights, privacy and the interests of LGBTQ minors urged the House to vote no on the legislation, criticizing it as “blatantly unconstitutional.”
Evan Greer, director of the tech policy group Fight For the Future, also lambasted the bill as “dangerous and misguided” and “wildly broad.”
The coalition largely takes issue with the Kids Online Safety Act’s “duty of care” provision that requires companies to “prevent and mitigate” harms associated with anxiety, depression, eating disorders, substance use disorders and suicidal behaviors.
During a joint virtual press conference hosted by the groups during the Senate vote, Greer described the provision as “a blank check for censorship of any piece of content that an administration could claim is harmful to kids.”
“What that means in practice, is that for example, a Trump administration FTC would get to dictate what types of content platforms can recommend or even show to younger users,” Greer said, referring to Republican presidential nominee and former President Donald Trump.
Jenna Leventoff, senior policy counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union, said the Kids Online Safety Act is “nothing more than a thinly veiled effort to censor information that some consider objectionable”
“If enacted, KOSA could lead to information about health care, gender, identity, politics and more being removed from social media. And kids note that censorship will make them less and not more safe,” Leventoff said. “As one student recently told me, they don’t get sex education in school, and if information about sex is removed from the internet because platforms fear liability for hosting it, how else can they learn about sex?”
Teens in opposition
The ACLU brought roughly 300 teens to Capitol Hill Thursday to lobby against the legislation.
Dara Adkinson, of the organization TransOhio, said the legislation is “truly terrifying.”
Adkinson questioned whether state and federal authorities could argue that content about climate change or the nation’s history of slavery causes anxiety and should therefore be regulated.
Regarding content about transgender youth, Adkinson said: “We know there (are) people out there that would like us to not exist and having the lack of visibility of the kinds of resources found on the internet is the first step for many of these folks.”
Greer said the coalition is concerned about the role of “big tech” in society. Advocates would support a “heavily modified” version of the Kids Online Safety Act that focuses on regulating business practices, including targeted advertising or videos that automatically play and encourage continuous, addictive scrolling habits.
Greer said their organization is neutral on the legislation targeted at protecting children’s privacy, but that they would like to see comprehensive legislation that protects minors and adults alike.
“Censorship and privacy do not go together, and these should not be moving together,” Greer said.
South Dakota
SD Lottery Powerball, Lucky For Life winning numbers for Dec. 20, 2025
The South Dakota Lottery offers multiple draw games for those aiming to win big. Here’s a look at Dec. 20, 2025, results for each game:
Winning Powerball numbers from Dec. 20 drawing
04-05-28-52-69, Powerball: 20, Power Play: 3
Check Powerball payouts and previous drawings here.
Winning Lucky For Life numbers from Dec. 20 drawing
08-21-30-41-47, Lucky Ball: 15
Check Lucky For Life payouts and previous drawings here.
Winning Lotto America numbers from Dec. 20 drawing
09-12-34-45-50, Star Ball: 01, ASB: 02
Check Lotto America payouts and previous drawings here.
Winning Dakota Cash numbers from Dec. 20 drawing
04-15-17-23-35
Check Dakota Cash payouts and previous drawings here.
Feeling lucky? Explore the latest lottery news & results
Are you a winner? Here’s how to claim your prize
- Prizes of $100 or less: Can be claimed at any South Dakota Lottery retailer.
- Prizes of $101 or more: Must be claimed from the Lottery. By mail, send a claim form and a signed winning ticket to the Lottery at 711 E. Wells Avenue, Pierre, SD 57501.
- Any jackpot-winning ticket for Dakota Cash or Lotto America, top prize-winning ticket for Lucky for Life, or for the second prizes for Powerball and Mega Millions must be presented in person at a Lottery office. A jackpot-winning Powerball or Mega Millions ticket must be presented in person at the Lottery office in Pierre.
When are the South Dakota Lottery drawings held?
- Powerball: 9:59 p.m. CT on Monday, Wednesday, and Saturday.
- Mega Millions: 10 p.m. CT on Tuesday and Friday.
- Lucky for Life: 9:38 p.m. CT daily.
- Lotto America: 9:15 p.m. CT on Monday, Wednesday and Saturday.
- Dakota Cash: 9 p.m. CT on Wednesday and Saturday.
This results page was generated automatically using information from TinBu and a template written and reviewed by a South Dakota editor. You can send feedback using this form.
South Dakota
With discretion left to agencies, police video releases rare in South Dakota
South Dakota’s weak open records law gives police agencies full discretion on whether to release footage from body or dashboard cameras, and in most cases, the videos of officer conduct are never shown to the public.
South Dakota News Watch made formal public records requests to obtain video footage of use of deadly force incidents from eight separate law enforcement agencies in November, and all of the requests were quickly denied.
On a few occasions, South Dakota law enforcement agencies have released video footage of their own accord but not necessarily in cases where officer conduct is in question.
The Watertown Police Department released a video on Facebook in early November showing officers responding to a possible break-in with their guns drawn only to find a whitetail buck that had made it into a bedroom.
In 2016, the Rapid City Police Department posted a dash cam video to its public Facebook page showing the chief’s nephew proposing to his girlfriend in a mock traffic stop. “This one is too good not to share,” the Facebook post noted.
(Watertown Police Department Facebook page)
The Rapid City Police Department rejected News Watch’s request for videos of a May 30, 2023, incident in which an officer fatally shot 25-year-old Kyle Whiting, who brandished a fake gun during a foot chase. A bystander inside a nearby home was also shot in the abdomen by the officer and survived. The state ruled the
shooting was justified
.
Some police agencies will occasionally release still images from body or dashboard camera videos, typically when the screenshots show an officer facing a clear threat that appears to justify use of deadly force.
In August, the state released an image from video of a July 5, chase in which a Sioux Falls police officer shot and wounded 24-year-old Deondre Gene Black Hawk in the 100 block of Garfield Avenue.
One still image released to the public shows the gun Black Hawk fired at police. Another image shows Black Hawk pointing the gun toward a pursuing officer prior to the shooting, which
was ruled justified
by state investigators.
In a move that appeared to have political overtones, videos were released in 2021 showing former South Dakota Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg being pulled over by officers for suspected traffic violations. The videos and audio showed Ravnsborg informing officers of his status as attorney general during the traffic stops, some of which did not result in tickets.
The videos were released during a period when Ravnsborg was facing possible removal from office for striking and killing a pedestrian in September 2020.
Ravnsborg was eventually impeached, an action supported by then-Gov. Kristi Noem, whose office also made the unprecedented move of releasing videos of Ravnsborg being interviewed by detectives during the investigation into the 2020 fatal accident.
(Screenshot of 2021 state video)
Video of a June 2023 police-involved shooting in South Dakota was released by the federal Bureau of Indian Affairs. In that incident, 39-year-old James Schneider of Watauga fired a weapon and then led authorities on a vehicle chase that ended at the Bullhead Community Center parking lot.
According to the dashboard video, Schneider was waving his arms and holding a handgun in an area where people were present. After he turned to flee into a residential neighborhood, he was shot in the back by an officer. Schneider was found guilty in August of assault and weapons charges after a jury trial and is awaiting sentencing.
In releasing
the video
, the BIA said it was doing so to be transparent in its operations. To protect the privacy of all involved, faces were blurred in the video.
McPherson County Sheriff David Ackerman, president of the South Dakota Sheriff’s Association, said body and dash cameras are important tools for police agencies in both urban and rural areas, even though his camera program costs about $60,000 a year, roughly 10% of the overall departmental budget.
“These are very valuable tools, and it’s something that in this day and age, every office and agency needs to have,” Ackerman said. “I’m glad where we are today because they’re for the protection of the public as well as the officers.”
Monty Rothenberger, assistant police chief in Yankton, said he supports the use of dash and body cameras as a way to increase accountability for officers and to aid in resolving public complaints.
“I wouldn’t do this job without a body camera, and I enjoy wearing it,” Rothenberger said. “I don’t have anything to hide. And because everything is on video, I feel like Big Brother is watching and I support that.”
— This story was originally published on southdakotanewswatch.org.
South Dakota
State medical board reprimands 2 M.D.s
PIERRE, S.D. (KELO) — Two people licensed to practice medicine in South Dakota have received official reprimands for unprofessional conduct.
The South Dakota Board of Medical and Osteopathic Examiners took the actions against Phinit Phisitkul, a foot and ankle surgeon for CNOS in Dakota Dunes, and Sheena Rippentrop, an OB/GYN who specializes in reproductive medicine for Sanford Health.
The South Dakota reprimands came after Phisitkul was officially punished by the Iowa Board of Medicine and after Rippentrop was officially punished by the North Dakota Board of Medicine.
Phisitkul admitted that he sexually harassed a medical student in 2017 while he was employed by the University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, where he practiced for 10 years.
Phisitkul agreed in a May 16, 2025, settlement with the Iowa board to take “live Board-approved courses on the subjects of professional boundaries and medical ethics,” have “a chaperone present during all examinations and consultations with female patients” for one year, and to pay a $2,500 civil penalty to the Iowa state treasurer.
Phisitkul signed a separate settlement agreement with the South Dakota board on June 26, 2025, and the board voted to accept it on September 11, 2025.
Rippentrop, meanwhile, was reprimanded by the South Dakota board earlier this year for “falsely documenting in a patient’s medical records that two IUI procedures were performed on the patient.”
The North Dakota medical board opened an investigation of Rippentrop in 2024 and considered an official complaint alleging that Rippentrop “falsely documented in a patient’s medical records that two intrauterine insemination (IUI) procedures were performed when Dr. Rippentrop did not complete an IUI on either occasion.”
The North Dakota complaint specifically said:
“(Rippentrop) established a physician patient relationship with Patient A. Patient A carried
the BRCA2 gene and wanted to proceed with in vitro fertilization (IVF). However, Patient A’s insurance required that Patient A go through three intrauterine inseminations (IUI) before
insurance would cover IVF. (Rippentrop) saw Patient A on August 17, 2024, and September 23,
2024 for an intrauterine insemination (IUI). On both dates, (Rippentrop) documented in Patient A’s chart that the IUI procedure was done without difficulty even though (Rippentrop) did not complete the IUI on either occasion.”
Rippentrop signed a stipulation on October 29, 2024, agreeing “the allegations in the Complaint are true and are grounds for disciplinary action by the North Dakota Board of Medicine.” The North Dakota board on January 31, 2025, approved its order that Rippentrop receive a reprimand.
The South Dakota board in turn approved its reprimand of Rippentrop on June 12, 2025.
Neither Rippentrop nor Phisitkul appeared at their hearings held by the South Dakota board.
-
Iowa6 days agoAddy Brown motivated to step up in Audi Crooks’ absence vs. UNI
-
Iowa1 week agoHow much snow did Iowa get? See Iowa’s latest snowfall totals
-
Maine5 days agoElementary-aged student killed in school bus crash in southern Maine
-
Maryland6 days agoFrigid temperatures to start the week in Maryland
-
Technology1 week agoThe Game Awards are losing their luster
-
South Dakota7 days agoNature: Snow in South Dakota
-
New Mexico4 days agoFamily clarifies why they believe missing New Mexico man is dead
-
World1 week agoCoalition of the Willing calls for transatlantic unity for Ukraine