PIERRE, S.D. — The South Dakota House of Representatives has advanced a bill 49–19 that would ban the use of eminent domain for carbon dioxide pipelines, sending the legislation to the state Senate.

Eminent domain refers to the power to take private property for public use, with just compensation to the owner determined by a court.

Supporters of the bill attended the House debate Monday at the South Dakota Capitol in Pierre and cheered when the vote was displayed. House Speaker Pro Tempore Karla Lems, R-Canton, proposed the legislation and said it does not stop carbon pipelines from being built in the state.

“They just don’t get the supreme power of eminent domain to force their projects down the throats of South Dakota people,” Lems said.

She owns land near the route of the Ames-based Summit Carbon Solutions’ proposed $9 billion pipeline. That project aims to transport some of the CO2 emitted by 57 ethanol plants in five states, including Iowa and eastern South Dakota, to an underground storage site in North Dakota. The project would be eligible for billions in climate-change-related federal tax credits for preventing the release of heat-trapping carbon into the atmosphere.

Summit has voluntary easement agreements with some landowners to cross their land, but needs eminent domain to gain access from landowners who are unwilling to sign easements. It received a permit for the Iowa portion in June, and over vocal public opposition, the Iowa Utilities Board granted it the ability to use eminent domain.

Supporters of the South Dakota bill said carbon pipelines do not meet the public-use standard required for eminent domain, which has typically been used by projects such as water and oil pipelines and electrical transmission lines.

Will Trump keep pipeline tax credits?

Opponents of the bill warned of economic repercussions for the ethanol industry.

“It sends a terrible message to the country,” said Rep. Greg Jamison, R-Sioux Falls.

Rep. Drew Peterson, R-Salem, said the bill could make South Dakota an impediment to President Donald Trump’s energy independence goals.

“Trump supports biofuels,” Peterson said. “We don’t get to affect federal policy, whether we want to or not.”

But House Majority Leader Scott Odenbach, R-Spearfish, said Trump is eliminating unwise environmental policies, and tax credits for carbon pipelines could be next. He said there were three reasons to vote in favor of the bill: voters sent a message in November with the defeat of a referred law perceived as helping carbon pipelines; carbon pipelines are hazardous when they leak; and the Legislature has a responsibility to clarify if carbon pipelines have eminent domain authority.

Gov. Larry Rhoden has not yet indicated whether he would sign the bill.

Attempts to ban eminent domain for carbon pipelines failed during prior legislative sessions, but supporters of the idea used grassroots efforts last year to get their candidates elected to the Legislature and installed in leadership positions, thereby improving the chances for this year’s legislation.

South Dakota Searchlight is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. South Dakota Searchlight maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Seth Tupper for questions: info@southdakotasearchlight.com.

PIERRE — The South Dakota Senate voted 18-17 on Tuesday at the Capitol to advance a bill mandating public schools to display the Ten Commandments in every classroom and teach their historical significance.

The bill now heads to the state House of Representatives.

Sen. John Carley, R-Piedmont, proposed the legislation. 

“These are historical principles that have been used in the tradition and founding of America,” Carley said. 

Opponents characterized the bill as a violation of the federal First Amendment constitutional principle of separation of church and state, and as a burdensome, unnecessary mandate. 

Sen. Jamie Smith, D-Sioux Falls, a former public school teacher, said schools already have the option to display the commandments. They are also required to display the national motto, “In God We Trust,” due to state legislation adopted six years ago. 

“I’m sitting here in a room full of people that believe in smaller government, less government,” Smith said, referring to the Republican-dominated state Senate. “And we’re making a mandate.”

The bill would require 8-by-14-inch posters with “easily readable font.” Schools would have to additionally display a three-part, roughly 225-word statement near the posters containing information about the commandments’ historical significance. 

The legislation would replace existing language in state law allowing local school boards to choose to display the Ten Commandments.

The bill would also require the Ten Commandments to be taught as part of history and civics classes three times during a student’s education — at least once during each of the elementary, middle and high school years. Additional provisions in the bill would require instruction on the state and federal constitutions, the federal Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence.

The bill would require the Ten Commandments to be presented “as a historical legal document, including the influence of the Ten Commandments on the legal, ethical, and other cultural traditions of Western civilization.”

Carley said displaying and teaching the commandments would instill a moral grounding in students.

He pointed to a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision, Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, which he said upheld public religious displays rooted in tradition. The ruling upheld a football coach’s post-game prayer as protected free speech and religious expression, emphasizing it was personal, voluntary and non-coercive. 

Sen. Lauren Nelson, R-Yankton, said the South Dakota bill is not coercive.

“It’s not about forcing people to believe a certain way, but about understanding where we came from as a country,” Nelson said.

Video of a Jan. 28, 2025, debate in the South Dakota Senate about legislation that would mandate the teaching and display of the Ten Commandments in public schools. (Courtesy of South Dakota Public Broadcasting)

Sen. Red Dawn Foster, D-Pine Ridge, unsuccessfully proposed an amendment that would have allowed schools to substitute a list of Native American values for the commandments. 

She said many Native Americans view the bill as perpetuating the historical policies of federal boarding schools, where Indigenous children were forced to speak English, convert to Christianity and forsake their own cultural practices.

Carley replied that he didn’t see any documentation that the list of Native American values proposed for inclusion by Foster had an “influence on the foundation of America.”

Sen. David Wheeler, R-Huron, is a lawyer. He raised the specter of lawsuits, pointing to ongoing litigation against a similar law in Louisiana. That state became the first to enact a law requiring the Ten Commandments to be displayed in classrooms. 

“It’s a guaranteed lawsuit,” Wheeler said.

Wheeler did not vote in favor of the bill, but he did convince senators to add an amendment that would require the state attorney general to defend any lawsuits arising from the legislation at the state’s expense, rather than burdening local school districts.  

We’ve reported how several eminent domain bills have been introduced in the Oklahoma legislature which convenes its 2025 session next week.

Legislators will trail two other states where eminent domain for development of energy projects drew opposition. The South Dakota House passed a bill 49-19 to ban the use of eminent domain for carbon pipelines, sending the legislation to the state Senate. (South Dakota Searchlight)

The South Dakota Searchlight reported the proposed $9 billion Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline drew opposition over the possible use of eminent domain. However, the bill that received approval this week would not prevent construction of the pipeline.

“They just don’t get the supreme power of eminent domain to force their projects down the throats of South Dakota people,” said House Speaker Pro Tempore Karla Lems who owns land near the proposed pipeline. The Summit pipeline proposes to transport some of the CO2 emitted from 57 ethanol plants in five surrounding states and move it to an underground storage site in North Dakota.

The North Dakota legislature plans to hold hearings this week on a series of carbon pipeline bills, including one prohibiting the use of eminent domain during development. The bills were sparked by the same Summit pipeline.

One bill, House Bill 1414 specifies that the state may not use eminent domain for carbon dioxide pipelines and revokes common carrier status for carbon pipelines, reported the North Dakota Monitor.

Under the bill, solar, wind and hydrogen energy projects would also not be allowed to use eminent domain.