South Dakota lawmakers are preparing to reintroduce a controversial bill in the 2025 legislative session that would mandate age verification for websites hosting adult content. Representative Bethany Soye (R-Sioux Falls) is leading the effort following the failure of her original bill, House Bill 1257, in the state Senate earlier this year.

The proposed legislation aims to require stricter age verification methods, such as government-issued IDs, to prevent minors from accessing explicit material online.

The renewed push comes as debates over child protection and digital safety continue to gain traction nationwide. Soye, a vocal advocate for stricter internet regulations, framed the legislation as a necessary step to protect minors from online exposure to explicit content.

“The pornography industry is not welcome here in South Dakota to prey on our children,” she stated. “Their innocence is not for sale. We must protect our kids, and I urge my colleagues to stand with me.”

The original bill, introduced in early 2024, passed the House of Representatives without significant opposition but was blocked in the Senate in March due to concerns over its constitutionality and enforceability. Senate critics, led by Senator Helene Duhamel (R-Rapid City), questioned how the state could effectively implement and enforce such age verification requirements. Duhamel also raised concerns about potential financial implications for the state, particularly if the law were challenged in court and found unconstitutional.

“We do not want South Dakota taxpayer dollars awarded to pornographers by a judge because we passed a bad law,” said Duhamel, who chairs the subcommittee on protecting minors from harmful content. “And we do not want to give any of these sketchy companies access to state databases for their age verification.”

Key Provisions of the New Bill

The revised bill aims to address concerns raised during the 2024 session while maintaining its core focus on child protection. Key features of the proposed legislation include:

• Strict Age Verification: Websites that “create, host, or make available material harmful to minors” would be required to implement age verification methods, such as using government-issued identification or other “reliable means.”
• Enforcement Measures: Websites would receive one written warning for non-compliance before facing prosecution.
• Criminal Penalties: The legislation introduces penalties for websites that engage in deceptive practices to avoid compliance.

Soye and her supporters argue that the revised language in the bill enhances the legal standing of the measure, making it more likely to withstand potential legal challenges.

South Dakota’s Republican Attorney General, Marty Jackley, has expressed support for age verification measures, highlighting the importance of restricting minors’ access to illicit online content. “I support age verification for illicit websites,” he stated, aligning himself with the broader national debate on regulating explicit content accessible to minors.

Despite Jackley’s endorsement, the bill still faces resistance. Civil liberties groups and digital rights advocates argue that such laws may infringe on privacy rights and set a precedent for increased government surveillance of online activity. There are also concerns about the security and privacy of users’ personal information, as implementing age verification would require users to provide sensitive identification details.

The bill’s critics emphasize the potential pitfalls of handing over identification data to third-party verification companies.

“This legislation raises serious questions about privacy, data security, and whether the state could inadvertently grant access to private information to unscrupulous actors,” said a representative from the South Dakota chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

The move to reintroduce age verification legislation in South Dakota is part of a wider effort seen across several U.S. states. In recent years, states like Louisiana, Utah, and Arkansas have passed similar laws requiring age verification for access to adult content. Proponents often argue that such measures are necessary to protect children, citing studies—though sometimes disputed—about the negative psychological impacts of pornography on minors.

Soye, who serves on the Summer Study Committee on Artificial Intelligence and Internet Regulation for Minors, pointed to these broader legislative trends as evidence of growing support for stricter regulations.

“It’s time for us to stop playing political games and pass this bill to protect our children from the harms of pornography,” she said.

With the legislative session slated to begin in early 2025, both supporters and opponents of the bill are preparing for a renewed debate. The revised proposal is expected to be introduced in the opening weeks of the session, potentially setting the stage for a high-profile battle over digital regulation and child protection in South Dakota.