South Dakota
Judge faults Corps for outcome of DAPL protests as trial wraps up third week • South Dakota Searchlight
A federal judge admonished U.S. Army Corps of Engineers officials for allowing Dakota Access Pipeline protesters to camp on Corps land without a permit, arguing that the agency could have prevented significant costs to North Dakota had it followed its own regulations properly.
“Permits are required for a reason,” U.S. District Court Judge Dan Traynor said in a Friday hearing in Bismarck.
The comments came as North Dakota concluded three weeks of witness testimony in a bench trial examining the United States’ actions during the 2016 and 2017 protests against the pipeline, commonly referred to as DAPL.
Dakota Access Pipeline protest costs debated during federal trial
The protests were organized in support of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, which opposed the project over concerns it intruded on tribal land and threatened its water supply.
The state of North Dakota seeks to recoup $38 million from the United States for costs it claims resulted from the demonstrations. The state says the federal government not only withheld necessary assistance from North Dakota during the protests, but also acted in ways that encouraged protesters.
Immediately after North Dakota rested its case, attorneys for the United States made a motion for a directed judgment — a request for a ruling in favor of the defense on the grounds that the evidence presented by the state is insufficient to continue the trial.
Timothy Jafek, special attorney to the United States, argued Friday that North Dakota has not demonstrated that the Corps was at fault for most of the damages caused by protesters.
Jafek also claimed that during the protests, Corps officials and North Dakota law enforcement both favored allowing campers to remain on Corps land rather than trying to evict them.
North Dakota never asked the Army Corps of Engineers to remove the protesters because the state “knew it was a request they couldn’t fulfill,” he said.
200,000 comments submitted on Dakota Access Pipeline environmental review
Traynor denied the motion, arguing that the Corps should have never allowed protesters to remain on its land without a permit — not only because its own regulations appear to require it, but also because Corps officials knew the demonstrations posed a significant risk.
A permit would have given the Corps an opportunity to secure compensation for any damage by protesters, as well as leverage to require demonstrators to comply with safety and sanitation regulations, he said.
“The failure to require a permit is unreasonable under the circumstances,” Traynor said.
The largest protest camp was located on Army Corps of Engineers land in Morton County. Thousands were estimated to be living in the camps at the protest’s peak.
Early on in the demonstrations, former Standing Rock Chairman Dave Archambault sought a special use permit from the Corps so protesters could demonstrate on Corps property legally, according to witness testimony.
Archambault is not expected to appear as a witness in the trial. He declined a request for comment through an attorney.
While the Army Corps of Engineers supported the idea of a permit, state officials — including former Gov. Jack Dalrymple — urged the Corps to deny it for fear a permit would prolong the protests.
The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe never completed its application for the permit, Corps witnesses testified in court.
Nonetheless, the Corps allowed protesters to remain on Corps land for several months. The Corps also went on to issue a press release that falsely stated the tribe had successfully obtained a permit.
“The Corps needed to be on the record saying we do support constitutional rights to protest,” Col. John Henderson, who served as commander of the Corps’ Omaha District during the protests, testified Feb. 27.
Federal agencies had an unusual level of involvement with the permit and other decisions related to the pipeline, Lt. Gen. Scott Spellmon, Henderson’s immediate superior during the protests, told the court on Wednesday.
In September 2016, the Department of Justice, Department of the Interior and Department of the Army published a statement asking pipeline company Energy Transfer Partners to voluntarily halt construction of the pipeline for additional regulatory review. The Corps has authority over a segment of the pipeline that crosses under the Missouri River north of the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation.
Henderson and Spellmon both said they were not aware of the statement before its release.
“Normally guidance and direction of this nature, we would have input,” Spellmon, who now serves as the Corps’ chief engineer and commanding general, said in court on Wednesday.
The Department of Army required the Corps to answer a series of additional technical questions about its assessment, which Spellmon said took three to four months.
Spellmon said he wasn’t aware of any other time the department had asked the Army Corps of Engineers to conduct additional analysis of this depth after the Corps had already reached a final decision on an easement.
The pipeline has been operating since June 2017. A judge in 2020 revoked the easement for the pipeline crossing north of Standing Rock, requiring a full environmental impact statement. The Corps is reviewing public comments submitted on the project and is on track to issue a final environmental impact statement this fall, a Corps official said last week during a hearing in Washington, D.C.
The trial is expected to continue for another week.
Under state law, any “interested person” can petition state boards to change administrative rules.
But South Dakota citizens and organizations don’t qualify as “persons” under that chapter of state law. The existence of that limitation surprised some members of the state Board of Elections on Wednesday during a meeting called for the express purpose of voting to advance or defeat a rules package the body spent two hours pondering last week.
The League of Women Voters leaned on what it believed to be its right to petition state board earlier this month when it offered the board a series of rule changes the group argued were necessary to standardize the administration of a new state law that requires first-time voter registrants to provide proof of U.S. citizenship.
The board dismissed the petition in a 5-2 vote on Wednesday after one of the board members told the group that the advocacy nonprofit lacks the legal standing to ask for the changes.
Last minute check of statutes calls petitioners’ status into question
The definition of a “person” able to petition a state board for a rule change only includes political subdivisions or agencies of the state, board member and retired Rapid City attorney Scott McGregor said.
McGregor did not attend the initial board meeting last week when the petition was presented, but he reviewed the matter over the weekend, he told South Dakota Searchlight after the meeting. With a 40-year career “making legal arguments based on statutory interpretations,” McGregor also reviewed relevant laws regarding the petition process.
McGregor said he wanted to see if “interested person” had a broad enough definition to include organizations such as the League of Women Voters.
“‘Person’ in various contexts has an awful lot of definitions,” McGregor said. “It depends on the section of the law you’re dealing with and the level of government you’re dealing with.”
McGregor spoke with the Secretary of State’s Office and its legal counsel earlier this week to confirm his interpretation. Deputy Secretary Tom Deadrick told McGregor that other agencies have accepted rule petitions from individuals.
“Even if other agencies have done it,” McGregor told Searchlight,” that doesn’t change the law.”
McGregor told board members he was “shocked” by the limitations.
“That may be an oversight, but that’s all that’s in there,” McGregor said during the meeting.
Board member Kent Alberty said he was “disappointed” that the law’s restrictions on petitioners wasn’t shared with board members earlier. Alberty, during last week’s meeting, said that he saw a need for at least some standardization in procedures in the administration of the citizenship requirement.
Alberty voted against the dismissal on Wednesday, as did Dewey County Auditor Jamalia Franzen.
McGregor told South Dakota Searchlight that the law should be reviewed legislatively.
“There is a certain unfairness to it,” McGregor said.
Acceptable documents for proving one’s citizenship under the new law in question on Wednesday include a birth certificate, passport, driver’s license, non-driver’s identification card or tribal identification card, or “any other type of acceptable documentation” under federal law. Photocopies of most of those documents are acceptable, but registrants using state- or tribally issued identification cards must have the physical cards with them.
If a voter does not provide necessary documentation, they are registered as federal-only voters and cannot participate in local or state elections.
The League of Women Voters proposals included:
- Allowing photocopies of identification cards, such as tribal IDs and driver’s licenses, to be used as proof of citizenship.
- Recognizing tribal identification cards from any federally recognized tribe, rather than just the nine tribes in South Dakota.
- Allowing voters designated as federal-only an opportunity to cast provisional ballots for local elections while appealing their eligibility.
- Adding specific language to the state’s voter registration form to explain that not offering a physical South Dakota address would cause them to be designated as federal-only voters.
- Adding language to notifications confirming a voter’s registration clearly saying if the registrant is a federal-only voter, as well as language explaining how to remedy the situation.
South Dakota Secretary of State Monae Johnson was ill during last week’s board meeting, at which the group took testimony from supporters of each rule. No one from her office was on hand to rebut the supporters, but her staff did file written responses in opposition.
On Wednesday, Johnson told the board that the new law, as written, does not allow photocopies of driver’s licenses, only the original card. She added that while no formal appeal process exists for voters registered as federal-only, they can remedy their status by resubmitting their registration with proper documentation.
“The League of Women Voters and other concerned organizations could look at amending the current law in the 2027 legislative session, if that is their wish,” Johnson said.
Johnson will not be seeking re-election for secretary of state in November. She lost the Republican nomination at last month’s state party convention to state Rep. Heather Baxter, who supported the bill that created the new law during the legislative session and will oversee its administration if elected. Baxter will face Democratic nominee Terrence Davis in the general election.
Baxter submitted public comment ahead of Wednesday’s meeting and compared the proposed changes to presenting a photocopy of identification to get through security at the airport or purchase alcohol. The state Department of Public Safety does not accept photocopies of identification documents, Baxter said.
“So why allow the League to make such changes to what law already clearly states as well as other state departments?!” Baxter wrote.
Amy Scott-Stoltz, president of the League of Women Voters of South Dakota, said the organization is “disappointed” in the board’s decision and “reviewing our options” regarding advancing its proposals and challenging the board’s dismissal.
The group’s petition was meant to make sure the new law is “uniformly implemented across the state and that voters and county auditors alike would have clear guidance about their obligations under the law in advance of the November election,” Scott-Stoltz said.
“We intend to continue our work in South Dakota to ensure that every American citizen can access the ballot box,” Scott-Stoltz said.
— This story was originally published on southdakotasearchlight.com.
The South Dakota Lottery offers multiple draw games for those aiming to win big.
Here’s a look at July 8, 2026, results for each game:
Winning Powerball numbers from July 8 drawing
12-29-37-43-55, Powerball: 18, Power Play: 4
Check Powerball payouts and previous drawings here.
Winning Lotto America numbers from July 8 drawing
17-26-31-32-37, Star Ball: 01, ASB: 02
Check Lotto America payouts and previous drawings here.
Winning Dakota Cash numbers from July 8 drawing
07-11-18-31-33
Check Dakota Cash payouts and previous drawings here.
Winning Millionaire for Life numbers from July 8 drawing
16-18-43-48-50, Bonus: 01
Check Millionaire for Life 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.
- Millionaire for Life: 10:15 p.m. CT daily.
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.
LARCHWOOD, Iowa (KIWA) – A Tea, South Dakota man has been arrested on a felony domestic abuse charge after an incident near Larchwood.
According to a criminal complaint filed with the Lyon County Clerk of Court’s Office by the Iowa State Patrol, 45-year-old Beau Christensen of Tea is accused of assaulting his girlfriend in their hotel room at Grand Falls Casino & Golf Resort near Larchwood. He was arrested on Wednesday, July 8.
In his statement, the state trooper who filed the report says Christensen put his hands around the victim’s neck. The victim stated she could not breathe while this was happening.
Christensen was charged with domestic abuse assault – impeding air or blood flow, a class D felony. If convicted, he could face up to five years in prison. He also faces a misdemeanor charge of possession of marijuana.
He faces a preliminary hearing on Friday, July 10.
At last report, Christensen remained in the Lyon County Jail in Rock Rapids in lieu of a $6000 bond.
Want to get the latest news and weather from Siouxland’s News Source? Follow these links to download our KTIV News app and our First Alert Weather app.
Copyright 2026 KTIV. All rights reserved.
-
Movie Reviews5 minutes ago‘Evil Dead Burn’ Movie Review – Spotlight Report
-
World13 minutes agoHoops Players’ Win Tops Big Day in NCAA Eligibility Litigation
-
Health38 minutes ago3 Best Peptides for Weight Loss—and the Viral One Doctors Say To Skip
-
Lifestyle53 minutes agoSmithsonian chief emphasizes ‘accuracy and integrity’ after White House report
-
Technology1 hour agoMicrosoft’s carbon emissions went up 25 percent last year
-
World1 hour agoJailed Catholic woman’s hunger strike highlights Iran religious persecution — US demands action
-
Politics1 hour agoIsrael shares intelligence warning Iran plotted new assassination attempt against Trump: report
-
Health1 hour agoParasitic infection causing ‘explosive’ stomach illness exceeds 1,000 cases in northern state
