South Dakota
South Dakota AI Laws: What's Enacted and What's Next (2027)
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited November 5, 2026). · Law checked current as of November 5, 2026. · 26 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content
As of November 2026, South Dakota has not enacted a comprehensive AI law. Its AI-related laws are three criminal and election statutes: SB 79 (2024) on computer-generated child pornography, SB 164 (2025) on election deepfakes, and SB 41 (2026) on sexually explicit digitally fabricated material, in force since July 1, 2026.
Every 2026 bill on chatbots, health insurer AI, AI therapy and an AI task force failed. For other states, see our AI laws by state guide.
SB 41 (2026): Digitally Fabricated Sexual Material, SDCL 22-21-4(3)
SB 41 (2026 S.L. ch. 104) was approved March 16, 2026, according to the Governor's message. It has no emergency clause, so under SDCL 2-14-16 it took effect July 1, 2026.
SDCL 22-21-4(3) applies when a person acts "without the consent or knowledge of the individual depicted or recorded," and 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."
The offense is to "knowingly and intentionally create, disclose, disseminate, distribute, or sell, by any means, digitally fabricated material depicting the identifiable individual" in a state of nudity or engaging in listed sexual conduct, such that an ordinary person viewing it would conclude the depiction is of that individual.
The enrolled act does not use the words "artificial intelligence". "Digitally fabricated material" is an image, photograph, video or other visual depiction that appears to an ordinary person to be an authentic depiction of an identifiable individual and "is adapted, generated, or modified to falsely depict an individual's appearance, conduct, or voice."
A violation is a Class 5 felony, which under SDCL 22-6-1 carries up to five years in prison and a fine of up to $10,000. Possession is not among the listed acts. More is on our South Dakota deepfake laws page.
SB 164 (2025): Election Deepfakes, SDCL 12-26-32 to 12-26-37
SB 164 (2025 S.L. ch. 68) was approved March 25, 2025, according to the Governor's message. It has no emergency clause, so it took effect July 1, 2025.
A "deepfake" under SDCL 12-26-32 is an image, audio recording or video recording "created or manipulated with the use of artificial intelligence or other digital technology that is so realistic, a reasonable person would believe it depicts the speech or conduct of an actual individual who did not in fact engage in the speech or conduct."
Under SDCL 12-26-33, "No person, with the intent to injure a candidate, may disseminate a deepfake or enter into a contract or other agreement to disseminate a deepfake, within ninety days of an election, if the person knows or reasonably should know the item being disseminated is a deepfake and does not include with the deepfake the disclosure described in § 12-26-37." A violation is a Class 1 misdemeanor, up to one year in county jail or a $2,000 fine, or both.
The disclosure is an affirmative defense. It must state, "This (image/video/audio) has been manipulated or generated by artificial intelligence."
Who can sue. The Attorney General, an injured or likely injured candidate, or the depicted individual may seek injunctive or other equitable relief under SDCL 12-26-35. Under SDCL 12-26-36, a violator is liable to the candidate and the depicted individual for damages, reasonable costs and attorney fees, and the plaintiff must show knowing use by clear and convincing evidence.
Who is exempt. SDCL 12-26-34 exempts satire or parody. It exempts a broadcaster that airs a deepfake in a bona fide newscast with a clear acknowledgment of authenticity questions, or that is paid to broadcast it. It exempts a website or periodical of general circulation that routinely carries news and commentary and is paid to publish it, and internet service, domain and cloud providers acting in a technical role.
SB 79 (2024): Computer-Generated Child Pornography, SDCL 22-24A
SB 79 (2024 S.L. ch. 87) was approved February 12, 2024, according to the Governor's message. It predates SB 164.
Under SDCL 22-24A-2(5), "computer-generated child pornography" is a visual depiction of an actual minor created, adapted or modified to depict that minor in a prohibited sexual act; of an actual adult so depicted as a minor; or of "an individual indistinguishable from an actual minor created by the use of artificial intelligence or other computer technology capable of processing and interpreting specific data inputs to create a visual depiction."
Under SDCL 22-24A-37, a person who creates, causes the creation of, or knowingly permits the creation of it commits a Class 2 felony. The statute sets a mandatory sentence of at least ten years for a first offense and at least twenty years for a second or later offense.
Possession and distribution are separate offenses. Under SDCL 22-24A-35, knowingly possessing computer-generated child pornography is a Class 4 felony with a mandatory sentence of at least one year for a first offense and at least five years for a second or later offense.
Under SDCL 22-24A-36, knowingly selling or distributing it is a Class 3 felony with a mandatory sentence of at least five years for a first offense and at least ten years for a second or later offense. A person convicted of distributing or manufacturing it may not also be convicted of possessing it for the same visual depiction.
AI in Government, Health Care, Hiring and Insurance
Health care and chatbots. We found no enacted South Dakota statute, based on the same searches. The bills listed below failed.
Hiring. We found no bill or statute on AI in employment, based on the searches described in the 2027 section below.
Government. HB 1125, an AI task force bill, failed on the House floor. The Legislature held a 2024 interim Study Committee on Artificial Intelligence and Regulation of Internet Access by Minors. We found no statute setting rules for state agency AI use, and we did not review agency guidance documents.
Insurance. South Dakota does not appear in the NAIC's status list, dated November 3, 2026, of states adopting its model bulletin on insurers' use of AI or issuing insurance-specific AI guidance. That list may not capture everything a regulator has said.
Attorney General. Attorneys general in Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Iowa, Montana, Nebraska and West Virginia announced separate suits against OpenAI on October 14, 2026. Official releases from several of those states also name Kansas. South Dakota is not among the states those releases name. We found no enforcement action under South Dakota's AI-related statutes, based on web searches, not a court docket search. We also found no governor's executive order on AI, based on a web search.
AI Note-Takers and Recording in South Dakota
For how South Dakota recording consent rules apply to AI meeting tools, see our South Dakota AI meeting recording laws page.
How Federal AI Policy Affects South Dakota
As of November 4, 2026, we found no federal statute in the public laws of the 119th Congress that sets general rules for private AI systems or generally preempts state AI laws. In December 2025, Executive Order 14365 directed federal agencies to challenge or discourage state AI laws the administration views as conflicting with national policy, and called for a federal framework from Congress. The order itself does not declare any state law invalid.
The Justice Department formed an AI Litigation Task Force in January 2026, the White House issued legislative recommendations in March 2026, and the FTC proposed a policy statement in July 2026. Separately, in April 2026 the Justice Department intervened in a lawsuit against Colorado's AI law under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. We did not find a published Commerce evaluation of state laws in the Federal Register or on ntia.gov, or a BEAD notice carrying the order's AI condition on NTIA's sites. Our state AI law preemption page tracks this.
South Dakota AI Bills That Failed (2024-2026)
These results come from the Legislature's action logs.
| Bill | Subject | Result |
|---|---|---|
| SB 168 (2026) | Chatbot use by minors | Deferred to the 41st legislative day, February 12, 2026 |
| SB 170 (2026) | Notice to consumers interacting with chatbots | Tabled, February 17, 2026 |
| SB 169 (2026) | AI use by health carriers | Withdrawn, February 17, 2026 |
| HB 1144 (2026) | AI in therapy and psychotherapy | Withdrawn, February 2, 2026 |
| HB 1125 (2026) | AI task force | Failed on the House floor, February 4, 2026 |
| SB 96 (2024) | Election deepfakes | Deferred to the 41st legislative day, February 23, 2024 |
What Changes in South Dakota AI Law in 2027
As of November 4, 2026, we found no AI law scheduled to take effect in South Dakota in 2027. We filtered all bill titles and the South Dakota Legislature's "Artificial Intelligence" subject keyword for the 2025 and 2026 sessions. In our drafting search for this page in November 2026, we also ran AI-related terms over the enrolled text of the 457 bills on its 2025 and 2026 session-law lists.
Those searches used AI-related terms and would miss a law using other words. The Legislature's site listed no bills for the 2027 session when read November 4, 2026.
This page is general legal information about South Dakota law as of November 4, 2026, not legal advice. Whether a law applies to a particular person or business depends on the facts, so consult a lawyer licensed in South Dakota for advice about your situation.
More South Dakota Laws
Explore other South Dakota law topics on Recording Law:
- South Dakota Recording Laws
- South Dakota Data Privacy Laws
- South Dakota Sexting Laws
- South Dakota Lemon Law
- South Dakota Child Support Laws
- South Dakota Deepfake Laws
- South Dakota AI Meeting Recording Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
Does South Dakota have an AI law?
South Dakota has no comprehensive AI law as of November 2026. Its AI-related laws are SB 79 (2024) on computer-generated child pornography, SB 164 (2025) on election deepfakes, and SB 41 (2026) on sexually explicit digitally fabricated material.
Are deepfakes illegal in South Dakota?
Certain ones. SB 41 makes it a Class 5 felony, without the depicted person's consent or knowledge and with a listed intent, to knowingly and intentionally create, disclose, disseminate, distribute or sell digitally fabricated material showing an identifiable individual nude or in sexual conduct. SB 164 covers election deepfakes disseminated with intent to injure a candidate within 90 days of an election without the required disclosure.
When did South Dakota SB 41 take effect?
July 1, 2026. The Governor approved it March 16, 2026, and it has no emergency clause, so the default July 1 date in SDCL 2-14-16 applies.
What is the penalty for an election deepfake in South Dakota?
A Class 1 misdemeanor, up to one year in county jail or a $2,000 fine, or both, where a person with intent to injure a candidate disseminates a deepfake within 90 days of an election and knows or reasonably should know it is a deepfake, without the disclosure. A violator can also be liable for damages, costs and attorney fees, and the disclosure is an affirmative defense.
Is AI-generated child pornography illegal in South Dakota?
Yes. SDCL 22-24A-2(5) covers an individual indistinguishable from an actual minor created by artificial intelligence or other computer technology, and it also covers altered depictions of actual minors and adults. Under SDCL 22-24A-37, creating it, causing its creation or knowingly permitting its creation is a Class 2 felony with a mandatory sentence of at least ten years for a first offense. Knowingly possessing it is a Class 4 felony and knowingly selling or distributing it is a Class 3 felony, each with a mandatory minimum sentence.
Does South Dakota regulate AI chatbots?
We found no enacted statute. SB 168 on minors' chatbot use was deferred and SB 170 on chatbot notices was tabled in February 2026.
Does South Dakota regulate AI in health care or hiring?
We found no enacted statute, based on AI-term searches of 2025 and 2026 bill titles, the Legislature's AI subject keyword and, in our November 2026 drafting search, the enrolled text of session laws. SB 169 on health carriers and HB 1144 on therapy were withdrawn in 2026.
Will South Dakota AI law change in 2027?
As of November 4, 2026, we found no AI law scheduled to take effect in South Dakota in 2027, and the Legislature's site listed no 2027 session bills.
Updates
Corrected the approval dates of SB 164 and SB 41, corrected the election deepfake exemptions, removed the claim that SB 164 was the first AI law, and added the 2026 bills that failed.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
Corrected the SB 41 penalty to a Class 5 felony (up to five years, not two), removed an offense of mere possession that the statute does not create, replaced an inaccurate quotation of the required election-deepfake disclosure with the exact wording of SDCL 12-26-37, added the statute’s intent element, and expanded the civil-remedy and AI-CSAM sections to match SDCL 12-26-35, 12-26-36, 22-24A-2 and 22-24A-37.
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
South Dakota Codified Laws, Chapter 12-26: OFFENSES AGAINST THE ELECTIVE FRANCHISE
§ 12-26-33Deepfake--Use in election--Penalty.In force
No person, with the intent to injure a candidate, may disseminate a deepfake or enter into a contract or other agreement to disseminate a deepfake, within ninety days of an election, if the person knows or reasonably should know the item being disseminated is a deepfake and does not include with the deepfake the disclosure described in § 12-26-37. A violation of this section is a Class 1 misdemeanor.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at sdlegislature.gov
§ 12-26-35Deepfake--Injunction or other equitable relief.In force
The attorney general, a candidate who is injured or likely to be injured by the dissemination of a deepfake in violation of § 12-26-33, or the individual depicted in a deepfake disseminated in violation of § 12-26-33 may seek injunctive or other equitable relief prohibiting the dissemination of the deepfake.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at sdlegislature.gov
§ 12-26-36Deepfake--Civil liability--Burden of proof--No limitation.In force
A person who disseminates a deepfake in violation of § 12-26-33 is liable to the candidate and the individual depicted in the deepfake for damages, reasonable costs and attorney fees, and any other relief the court deems proper. The plaintiff bears the burden of establishing the person knowingly made use of a deepfake by clear and convincing evidence in any action brought pursuant to this section. Nothing in this section limits any other cause of action from being brought against a person who disseminates a deepfake in violation of § 12-26-33.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at sdlegislature.gov
§ 12-26-37Deepfake--Affirmative defense--Disclosure.In force
It is an affirmative defense for any action brought pursuant to §§ 12-26-32 to 12-26-37, inclusive, that the deepfake includes a disclosure stating: "This (image/video/audio) has been manipulated or generated by artificial intelligence." For an image or video recording, the text of the disclosure must appear in a size that is easily readable by the average viewer and no smaller than the largest font size of other text appearing in the image or video recording. The disclosure must be superimposed over each deepfake. For an audio recording, the disclosure must be read in a clearly spoken manner and in a pitch that is easily heard by the average listener at the beginning and end of the audio recording.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at sdlegislature.gov
South Dakota Codified Laws, Chapter 22-21: INVASIONS OF PRIVACY
§ 22-21-4Prohibited recording or manipulated image--Penalty.In forcecited in 12 of our articles
No individual, without the consent or knowledge of the individual depicted or recorded, and 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, may: (1) Intentionally use any device to photograph or visually record the individual without clothing or under or through the clothing, or with a third individual depicted in a sexual act, for the purpose of viewing the body of, or the undergarments worn by, the individual; (2) Intentionally disclose, disseminate, distribute, sell, or use, by any means, any recording or photograph described in subdivision (1); or (3) Knowingly and intentionally create, disclose, disseminate, distribute, or sell, by any means, digitally fabricated material depicting the identifiable individual: (a) In a state of nudity, as defined in § 22-24A-2, such that an ordinary person viewing the material would conclude that the depiction is of the identifiable individual in such a state of nudity; or (b) Engaging in sexual contact, sexual intercourse, deviant sexual activity, or sexually explicit conduct such that an…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at sdlegislature.gov
Cited in 1 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2006
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Blair (South Dakota Supreme Court 2006, 721 N.W.2d 55)“…w peeking under SDCL 22- 21-3, or with a misdemeanor under SDCL 22-21-4 for taking pictures of someone in 17.…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: South Dakota Smart Glasses Recording Laws: One-Party Guide, South Dakota Recording Laws (2026): One-Party Consent Rules, South Dakota Laws on Recording in Public
South Dakota Codified Laws, Chapter 22-24A: CHILD PORNOGRAPHY
§ 22-24A-2Definitions.In forcecited in 2 of our articles
Terms used in §§ 22-19A-1, 22-24A-1 to 22-24A-20, inclusive, 22-24B-1, 23A-27-14.1, and 43-43B-1 to 43-43B-3, inclusive, mean: (1) "Adult," any person eighteen years of age or older; (2) "Child pornography," any image or visual depiction of a minor engaged in prohibited sexual acts; (3) "Child" or "minor," any person under the age of eighteen years; (3A) "Child-like sex doll," any obscene anatomical doll, obscene anatomical mannequin, or obscene anatomical robot that is intentionally designed to resemble a prepubescent child and either to entice sexual excitement or to engage in prohibited sexual acts; (4) "Computer," any electronic, magnetic, optical, electrochemical, or other high-speed data processing device performing logical, arithmetic, or storage functions and includes any data storage facility or communications facility directly related to or operating in conjunction with such device, including wireless communication devices such as cellular phones.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at sdlegislature.gov
Cited in 3 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2011
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Blair (South Dakota Supreme Court 2006, 721 N.W.2d 55)“…the purpose of watching them defecate and urinate. See SDCL 22-24A-2 (defining a prohibited sexual…”
- State v. Bruce (South Dakota Supreme Court 2011, 796 N.W.2d 397)“…tiality, incest, sadomasochistic abuse and sexual battery. SDCL 22-24A-2(16). 6 Finally, the Legislature prescri…”
- State v. Dubois (South Dakota Supreme Court 2008, 746 N.W.2d 197)“…f such an act.” SDCL 22-24A-3(3) (emphasis added); see also SDCL 22-24A-2(2) (defining child pornography as: “an…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: South Dakota Sexting Laws: Legal Consequences and Penalties
§ 22-24A-37Manufacturing child pornography--Penalty.In forcecited in 3 of our articles
A person is guilty of manufacturing child pornography if the person creates, causes the creation of, or knowingly permits the creation of: (1) Any visual depiction of a minor engaged in a prohibited sexual act, or in a simulation of a prohibited sexual act; or (2) Any computer-generated child pornography. A violation of this section is a Class 2 felony. A conviction under this section for a first offense must be punished by a mandatory sentence in a state correctional facility of at least ten years. A conviction under this section for a second or subsequent offense must be punished by a mandatory sentence in a state correctional facility of at least twenty years. A person convicted of a violation of this section may not be convicted of possessing child pornography pursuant to § 22-24A-35 for the same visual depiction.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at sdlegislature.gov
Also relied on in: South Dakota Pornography Laws (2026): No State Obscenity Statute
South Dakota Codified Laws, Chapter 22-6: AUTHORIZED PUNISHMENTS
§ 22-6-1Felony classes and penalties--Restitution--Habitual criminal sentences.In forcecited in 14 of our articles
Except as otherwise provided by law, felonies are divided into the following nine classes which are distinguished from each other by the following maximum penalties which are authorized upon conviction: (1) Class A felony: death or life imprisonment in a state correctional facility. A lesser sentence than death or life imprisonment may not be given for a Class A felony. In addition, a fine of fifty thousand dollars may be imposed; (2) Class B felony: life imprisonment in a state correctional facility. A lesser sentence may not be given for a Class B felony. In addition, a fine of fifty thousand dollars may be imposed; (3) Class C felony: life imprisonment in a state correctional facility. In addition, a fine of fifty thousand dollars may be imposed; (4) Class 1 felony: fifty years imprisonment in a state correctional facility. In addition, a fine of fifty thousand dollars may be imposed; (5) Class 2 felony: twenty-five years imprisonment in a state correctional facility. In addition, a fine of fifty thousand dollars may be imposed; (6) Class 3 felony: fifteen years imprisonment in a state correctional facility.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at sdlegislature.gov
Cited in 145 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):State v. Weiker (1983) read SDCL 22-6-1 Class 1 felony penalty, then life imprisonment, as a maximum rather than a mandatory term, and struck the resulting life sentences as disproportionate under the state constitution. State v. Chipps (2016) applied the section class maximums as the yardstick in gross disproportionality review.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Moeller (South Dakota Supreme Court 1996, 548 N.W.2d 465)“…do so, the conviction for murder in the first degree under SDCL 22-6-1 would be life imprisonment in the state…”
- State v. Weiker (South Dakota Supreme Court 1983, 342 N.W.2d 7)✓A man with three prior burglary convictions drew life without parole on three drug distribution counts as a habitual offender; the court read SDCL 22-6-1(2) as fixing life as the maximum, not a mandatory, Class 1 felony penalty and struck the sentences as disproportionate.
- State v. Rice (South Dakota Supreme Court 2016, 2016 S.D. 18)✓Rice organized a robbery that ended in a fatal shooting and received 80 years with 20 suspended for first-degree manslaughter; the court used the life maximum SDCL 22-6-1 sets for a Class C felony as its yardstick and found the term not grossly disproportionate.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: How Long Is a Life Sentence in South Dakota? (2026 Guide), How Many Years for Second Degree Murder? Sentences by State (2026), South Dakota AI Meeting Recording Laws (2026)
Sources and References
- SB 79 (2024), 2024 S.L. ch. 87(sdlegislature.gov).gov
- SB 164 (2025), 2025 S.L. ch. 68(sdlegislature.gov).gov
- SB 41 (2026), 2026 S.L. ch. 104(sdlegislature.gov).gov
- Senate Journal, Governor's message on SB 41(sdlegislature.gov).gov
- SDCL 2-14-16, effective date of acts(sdlegislature.gov).gov
- SDCL 22-21-4(sdlegislature.gov).gov
- SB 41 enrolled text(sdlegislature.gov).gov
- SDCL 22-6-1(sdlegislature.gov).gov
- Senate Journal, Governor's message on SB 164(sdlegislature.gov).gov
- SDCL 12-26-32(sdlegislature.gov).gov
- SDCL 12-26-33(sdlegislature.gov).gov
- SDCL 12-26-37(sdlegislature.gov).gov
- SDCL 12-26-35(sdlegislature.gov).gov
- SDCL 12-26-36(sdlegislature.gov).gov
- SDCL 12-26-34(sdlegislature.gov).gov
- Senate Journal, Governor's message on SB 79(sdlegislature.gov).gov
- SDCL 22-24A-2(sdlegislature.gov).gov
- SDCL 22-24A-37(sdlegislature.gov).gov
- Study Committee on Artificial Intelligence and Regulation of Internet Access by Minors(sdlegislature.gov).gov
- NAIC, Implementation of Model Bulletin: Use of Artificial Intelligence Systems by Insurers (status as of November 3, 2026)(content.naic.org)
- SB 168 (2026)(sdlegislature.gov).gov
- SB 170 (2026)(sdlegislature.gov).gov
- SB 169 (2026)(sdlegislature.gov).gov
- HB 1144 (2026)(sdlegislature.gov).gov
- HB 1125 (2026)(sdlegislature.gov).gov
- SDCL 22-24A-35(sdlegislature.gov).gov
- SDCL 22-24A-36(sdlegislature.gov).gov