HB 1274 prohibits the delivery or distribution of abortion-inducing medicine, drugs, or substances into South Dakota for purposes of an illegal abortion, with exceptions for self-administration by a pregnant person, life-saving medical procedures, or miscarriage management. It establishes a Class 6 felony for violating this prohibition, imposes civil penalties up to $10,000 per dose, and allows civil lawsuits for wrongful death of an unborn child by specific parties (e.g., parents, the pregnant person, or their estate). The bill directly affects medical providers, pharmacies, and anyone transporting such substances into the state, while exempting individuals acting in self-defense or under medical necessity. The attorney general may seek injunctions to stop violations and collect civil penalties for deposit into a state fund.
HB 1257 redefines "abortion" in South Dakota law to include any action intending to terminate a pregnancy with knowledge it will likely cause the unborn child's death, while excluding specific medical treatments (like miscarriage care, ectopic pregnancy treatment, or procedures to save the unborn child's life). It requires physicians to determine that a pregnancy poses a "reasonably foreseeable risk of death" to the mother before permitting an abortion, mandates attempts to preserve both lives when possible, and mandates hospital-based reporting to the Department of Health. The bill directly affects pregnant individuals, physicians, and hospitals by setting strict medical criteria for legal abortions and prohibiting abortions based solely on psychological conditions or self-harm fears. It does not criminalize all abortions but creates a narrow exception for life-threatening conditions, with violations classified as Class 6 felonies.
HB 1160 repeals the legal requirement for a medical marijuana oversight committee in South Dakota. The bill ends a committee that was mandated to meet twice yearly to evaluate the medical cannabis program, including patient access, dispensary operations, testing facilities, and regulatory safeguards. This change removes the committee's structure and duties, which included making recommendations to the legislature about the program's effectiveness and regulations. The repeal applies to the medical cannabis program established under existing law.
SB 220 directs South Dakota's Department of Corrections to conduct a study evaluating juvenile correctional and residential facilities. The study must examine best practices, therapeutic housing models, vocational training combined with mental health services, and staff-to-youth ratios, including inspections at three facilities outside South Dakota. The bill appropriates $50,000 from the general fund to cover study costs and requires a written report to the Legislative Research Council by September 1, 2026. This is a procedural study bill with no direct policy changes or new requirements for facilities, solely aimed at gathering information for future decisions.
HB 1105 prevents property owners in specific areas from using contracts or declarations to block healthcare services on commercial property. It applies to municipalities/townships under 3,000 people (per federal census) or areas officially designated as medically underserved by South Dakota’s Department of Health. The bill invalidates any contract or declaration that restricts the use of commercial property for healthcare services like clinics, diagnoses, or treatment in these areas. This directly affects property owners and developers who previously could impose such restrictions, while enabling healthcare providers to operate in underserved communities.
HB 1068 allows South Dakota pharmacists to dispense ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine to adults 18+ based on written protocols created by physicians. These protocols must include risk assessments, drug information (indications, usage, side effects), and instructions for handling adverse events. The law shields physicians and pharmacists from liability for good-faith compliance, except in cases of gross negligence or willful misconduct. It directly affects healthcare providers who dispense these drugs and patients receiving them under this new process.
