The South Dakota Senate voted 30–4 on Wednesday to increase criminal penalties for using threats or violence to prevent someone from practicing their religion.
Why it matters
SB 113 raises the offense from a misdemeanor to a felony, increasing pen Supporters say the change responds to recent incidents where protesters disrupted religious services in other states.
Sen. Jim Mehlhaff, R-Pierre, said the bill grew out of discussions among Senate and House leadership and the Governor’s Office after protesters entered places of worship and interfered with services.
“We all got together and discussed the situations that we saw unfold in St. Paul over some of the ICE riots were agitated, many of them from out of state and paid, invaded the sanctuary of a church in St. Paul and menaced, harassed, and prevented those parishioners from holding their worship service,” Mehlhaff said.
Mehlhaff also cited incidents at a New York City synagogue where protesters blocked religious services.
South Dakota law currently classifies as a Class 1 misdemeanor any intentional prevention of lawful religious acts through threat or violence. Senate Bill 113 raises the offense to a felony.
Mehlhaff argued the conduct described goes beyond disorderly conduct or trespassing.
“If you have an event like what many of us witnessed on TV, where they were actually preventing parents from getting to their children in the Sunday school classes in the basement, threatening violence against parishioners, and just totally disrupting the service, that would be a class six felony,” he said. (2:39–3:00)
Sen. Paul Miskimins, R-Mitchell, described personal connections to the St. Paul incident and said children attending Sunday school were frightened.
“But when those people came into that church, they stood in the hallway and kept those protesters away from the children who were in Sunday school, and the children were scared to death,” Miskimins said.
Some senators raised concerns about the bill’s scope. Sen. Mykala Voita, R-Bonesteel, said the language could be interpreted too broadly.
“When I read this, it just seems so open-ended. There’s nothing in this little piece of statute that says, like in a place of worship, in an official event, nothing like that,” Voita said.
Sen. John Carley, R-Piedmont, questioned whether the law could apply to police actions involving people praying in public spaces.
Mehlhaff responded that the statute applies only when threats or violence are used and said questions involving arrests would fall under other laws and policies.
“If I was going to pray the rosary, and somebody threatened physical harm to me, or actually perpetrated physical harm to me to stop me from doing that prayerful ritual, that would be a felony,” he said.
In closing, Mehlhaff said the bill strikes a balance between religious freedom and protest rights.
“If they come to South Dakota, they ought to plan to stay a while,” he said.
The bill now moves to the House for consideration.
