Connect with us

South Dakota

The Catholic father-son duo fighting for abortion rights in South Dakota

Published

on

The Catholic father-son duo fighting for abortion rights in South Dakota


This story is part of an investigative series and new documentary, The A-Word, by The Independent examining the state of abortion access and reproductive care in the US after the fall of Roe v Wade.

On May 2, 2022, Rick Weiland — longtime Democrat and former candidate for Congress —  and his son Adam were driving home from South Dakota’s state capitol. The father-son duo had just successfully filed the required number of signatures to put Medicaid expansion on the ballot, when the Supreme Court’s draft of its forthcoming Dobbs decision leaked.

“We immediately started talking about it,” Adam, who left the private sector shortly after Donald Trump became president to join his father in politics, tells The Independent. “Then we got our attorney on the phone.”

Aware of the state’s trigger law that would automatically ban abortion if and when the Supreme Court overturned Roe v Wade, the pair appreciated the gravity of the situation. But it wasn’t until two women — one Democrat, one Republican — urged them to do something about it that they realized what steps they personally needed to take.

Advertisement

“It was Kathy Pearsal, a longtime Democrat and trial lawyer, and Jan Nicoli, a Republican and former appropriations committee chair,” Adam explains. “Just a couple of badass women in their early 80s, late 70s — diehard reproductive rights warriors — who reached out to us and said that it was really important that something gets done.

“This is something that we both felt very strongly about anyway,” Adam continues, “but I have to give the credit to them for connecting the dots. We all got together, drafted the amendment, filed it and started collecting signatures.”

On June 24, 2022, Rick and Adam’s fear was realized — the Supreme Court overturned Roe v Wade and abortion was automatically banned in South Dakota.

Thankfully, they were already preparing for the fight ahead.

Weiland during his 2014 Senate bid
Weiland during his 2014 Senate bid (Rick Weiland)

A historic 10 states will have abortion-related measures on the ballot come November, giving voters the chance to expand or protect access to abortion care in their home states. Yet only one state with a near-total ban — South Dakota — is leaving the fate of abortion access up to its citizens.

In South Dakota, it is illegal to end a pregnancy from the moment of conception, with no exceptions for rape or incest. The post-Roe ban does allow for exceptions when the life of the pregnant person is in danger, but like other states with similar rules, the exception language is comically vague — doctors across South Dakota are now afraid to treat pregnant patients in dire situations for fear of prosecution.

Advertisement

OBGYNs are leaving the state. Pregnant patients are traveling to nearby Minnesota or beyond for routine prenatal care. Others are left to fend for themselves, without the financial resources to end an unwanted or potentially dangerous pregnancy in a state with a high preterm birth rate, a growing number of maternity care deserts, and six of America’s 15 counties with the highest child poverty rate. 

A sign at the South Dakota border displays the state’s motto
A sign at the South Dakota border displays the state’s motto (Getty)

South Dakota’s Ballot Measure G would change all that by restoring and enshrining Roe v Wade-era abortion protections in the state’s constitution.

To many outsiders looking at the political climate of South Dakota — where Republicans hold every statewide office and all but 11 of 105 seats in the state legislature — Rick and Adam Weiland’s efforts could seem ill-fated at best. But the lifelong politician and his son believe in the will of the people, and poll after poll shows that, regardless of party affiliation, South Dakotans overwhelmingly want access to abortion care.

“We still have the ability to drive some pretty incredible, progressive public policy,” Rick says. “My first foray into this space, when I was a candidate for the Senate, was helping with the effort to increase minimum wage.

“We got payday lender reform,” Rick continues. “We brought Medicaid expansion here —  52,000 people got health insurance who didn’t have it … People should not forget about these red states or write them off, because there are ways to change things. We are changing things in South Dakota.”

The two are also heartened by South Dakota’s history of utilizing ballot measures — it was the first state to include direct democracy in its constitution via a statewide initiative and referendum process. Allowing voters to decide on public policy is not a bug but a feature of the state’s political process.

Advertisement
Abortion rights demonstrators rally outside the Supreme Court the day after a decision to overturn Roe v Wade in 2022
Abortion rights demonstrators rally outside the Supreme Court the day after a decision to overturn Roe v Wade in 2022 (Julia Saqui/The Independent)

“We’ve always been able to circumvent the special interests, bypass the legislature and put something on a ballot that lets the people decide yes or no,” Adam says. “‘Under God the people rule.’ That’s the South Dakota state motto.”

The father and son’s glass-half-full point of view — what Adam refers to as their “cockeyed Norwegian optimism” — does not blind them from the challenges ahead. Their grassroots organization, Dakotans for Health, is up against the powerful anti-abortion lobby, historically known for its harassment and bullying techniques as well as its bottomless pockets. Life Defense Fund, an anti-abortion organization, has sued them, arguing that the ballot measure is invalid and urging the court to rule that votes for the amendment should not be counted — a move that would defy the state’s history of citizen-originated ballot measures.

“It’s ridiculous,” Adam says. “The validity rate that we got from the secretary of state was one of the highest of any state ballot measure in 20 years. We had hundreds of people involved — a real grassroots effort by the people — and these guys, because they are terrified of a fair fight and are fixated on imposing their religious laws on the people of South Dakota, are essentially engaging in legal warfare.”

“They are looking for anything they can to deny the voters the right to decide,” Rick adds. “But we are confident that this will be voted on in November and that it will pass.”

This map shows which states will vote on an abortion measure in November
This map shows which states will vote on an abortion measure in November (The Independent)

The two are also guided by their faith — another perhaps surprising motivator for those who have bought into the anti-abortion narrative that suggests religious individuals do not obtain or believe in abortion access. (Many people who identify as religious have abortions — according to Guttmacher, 24 percent of abortion patients are Catholic, 17 percent are mainline Protestant, 13 percent are evangelical Protestant, and 8 percent identify with another religion.)

“We’re both raised Catholic. We’re both very motivated by social justice and social causes,” Adam explains. “So that is part of how we grew up — a lot of what we did as a family was work on social justice causes.”

Adam and a small group of volunteers spend most of their time in a nondescript building tucked behind a quaint Sioux Falls home, which serves as the Dakotans for Health headquarters. Among the stacked yard signs and bundled-up pamphlets, the group coordinates canvassing efforts and drums up donations that will help them reach as many would-be voters as possible before November.

Advertisement

“It’s a David and Goliath thing,” Adam says of their efforts. “We’re up against a powerful anti-abortion lobby with lots of money, who are not afraid to throw their weight around. It’s challenging in a small community, but anything that is worth doing isn’t going to be easy.”

When fatigue or despair threaten to set in, Adam says the very stakes he and his father talked about on that drive back from Pierre in 2022 bombard his mind — stakes that were made painfully clear when he visited South Dakota’s most rural areas while collecting signatures for Ballot Measure G.

JD Vance calls for “federal response” to prevent women traveling for abortions

“During the petition drive, people come up to you and talk to you about something terrible that has happened to them or someone they know,” he says. “Stories of being denied care, or going across state lines for miscarriage management. Stories of rape and incest. Those are very tragically real things here.

“The stories are everywhere, because this law is impacting everyone,” he adds.

In those moments, Adam says he tries not to dwell on what South Dakotans stand to lose — having been fighting in the political arena for much of his adult life, he knows that it could be 10, 20, even 30 years before another chance to restore and codify Roe v Wade into the state’s constitution is realized.

Advertisement

“People are being discriminated against because of who they are and where they live,” he says. “We are in a position to do something about it. We’re on the cusp of it. But yeah, it’s a little scary to think about… if we don’t succeed.”

Adam is particularly passionate about urging men to get involved in the ongoing efforts to expand and protect abortion efforts, not just in South Dakota but nationwide.

“Men need to wake the hell up,” he says. “Men must do a better job, because we’ve got something at stake here, too.

“Us being in this space, standing up and being visible in this space, is important,” he adds. “Perhaps we can inspire other men to be more vocal about it, because it makes a difference.”



Source link

Advertisement

South Dakota

South Dakota lawmakers push bill criminalizing deepfakes nearer to governor’s desk

Published

on

South Dakota lawmakers push bill criminalizing deepfakes nearer to governor’s desk


PIERRE — A bill from South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley to criminalize the creation or sharing of deepfakes was amended this week to more clearly define what constitutes nudity before it reaches Gov. Larry Rhoden’s desk.

The amendment, added on the floor of the House of Representatives, came in response to concerns about unintended consequences.

Senate Bill 41 creates a class of felony crime for the creation or distribution of images digitally altered to depict a person in a state of nudity or involved in a sexually explicit act, commonly referred to as deepfakes.

Advertisement

In testimony in the House Judiciary Committee on Monday in Pierre, Jackley pointed to the case of Mark Rathbun, a former Division of Motor Vehicles employee who is accused of taking images of women and girls from state databases and creating sexual images.“This is real, and it’s something that we unfortunately are seeing happen in our state,” Jackley said.

The judiciary committee voted 8-3 to send the bill to the House floor but not before a discussion on its potential to criminalize political memes.

The bill’s definition of nudity originally encompassed a partial state of nudity. Fort Pierre Republican Rep. Will Mortenson asked Jackley if that would include a fabricated topless photo. Jackley said yes. Then Mortenson asked if a fabricated image of Democratic Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker without a shirt, if shared by President Donald Trump on social media, would put the president in line for felony charges.

Jackley said a Pritzker image wouldn’t qualify because Pritzker is male, but Mortenson pushed back.

Advertisement

He noted that partially nude fabrications would be a felony if done with the intent to “self-gratify or alarm, annoy, embarrass, harass, invade the privacy of, threaten, or cause emotional, financial, physical, psychological, or reputational harm to that individual.”

Nothing in the bill specified that a person in a digitally fabricated topless image must be female.

“We just said that half-nude is a state of nudity, and so now he’s shirtless, and the point of this is to embarrass this guy,” Mortenson said of his topless Pritzker meme scenario.

Mortenson voted against the bill in committee but brought an amendment Tuesday to define nudity as inclusive of male or female genitalia, buttocks or the female nipple.

The amendment passed, but it did not address every concern about the bill.

Advertisement

Democratic Rep. Kadyn Wittman of Sioux Falls asked Jackley during the bill’s committee hearing why he didn’t use it to enhance penalties for people who film others in states of undress or participating in sexual activity against their will.

That behavior is a felony if it involves the recording of a minor, or if it happens repeatedly. The new penalties for deepfakes would be added to the same chapter of South Dakota law.

“Why is the first time hidden recording a misdemeanor generally, but a digitally fabricated image would automatically be a classified felony,” said Wittman.

Jackley said he feels that the creation of digitally manipulated sexual images, even if they aren’t shared, signals “significant criminal intent.” He told South Dakota Searchlight after the committee meeting that he’s open to addressing that issue, but that SB 41’s primary purpose was to target deepfakes.

On the House floor, Wittman was one of two representatives to say the bill’s felony penalties could be unnecessarily harsh in instances where young people make “a stupid decision” and create a deepfake.

Advertisement

“I feel like, in a lot of situations, this bill covers behavior that could be covered by a lower level of offense,” Wittman said.

Supporters countered that the creation of fake nudes can do real psychological damage to real people, and that the state needs to clearly signal that doing so is a serious crime.

“It’s only fun and games until it happens to you,” said Rep. Mary Fitzgerald, R-St. Onge.

The bill passed the House 60-6. It now moves to the state Senate, which passed the bill 32-0 on Jan. 16. The Senate would need to approve the amended version of the bill before it could be delivered to Gov. Larry Rhoden to sign or veto.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

South Dakota

SD Lottery Mega Millions, Millionaire for Life winning numbers for March 3, 2026

Published

on


The South Dakota Lottery offers multiple draw games for those aiming to win big.

Here’s a look at March 3, 2026, results for each game:

Winning Mega Millions numbers from March 3 drawing

07-21-53-54-62, Mega Ball: 16

Check Mega Millions payouts and previous drawings here.

Advertisement

Winning Millionaire for Life numbers from March 3 drawing

09-10-13-25-54, Bonus: 05

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.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

South Dakota

Nebraska volleyball to play regular-season match in South Dakota

Published

on

Nebraska volleyball to play regular-season match in South Dakota


Nebraska volleyball will play South Dakota State in a regular-season match in Brookings, S.D. The Huskers will face the Jackrabbits on September 2 at First Bank & Trust Arena.

Nebraska finished 2025 with a 33-1 overall record and was ranked No. 3 in the final AVCA poll of the season. South Dakota State was 23-5 and was the Summit League regular-season champions.

These two programs have faced each other before. They played a spring exhibition match in May 2025. The Huskers were victorious by a 4-0 sweep (25-18, 25-19, 25-17, 25-19).

Harper Murray led the Huskers in kills with 12, while also earning seven digs, five blocks and two aces. Andi Jackson delivered a double-double on the day, finishing with 11 kills and 10 blocks. 

Advertisement

Nebraska is scheduled to play two exhibition games this spring. The Huskers will face Iowa State in Sioux Falls, S.D. on April 11 and Creighton in Omaha on April 17.

Contact/Follow us @CornhuskersWire (https://twitter.com/CornhuskersWire) on X (formerly Twitter) and like our page onFacebook (https://www.facebook.com/CornhuskersWire) to follow ongoing coverage of Nebraska news, notes and opinions.





Source link

Continue Reading

Trending