Voter Suppression In South Dakota Is Well Underway, Even Without SCOTUS’s Help
from the subtracting-votes-by-adding-confusion dept
It may be almost impossible to devolve this country into a nation of slaveholders, but the Trump administration and all of its MAGA buddies are working hard to make sure a white person’s vote counts more than a vote cast by anyone else.
These bigots recently got an assist from the Supreme Court, which decided minorities can have their votes rendered meaningless so long as the people doing the gerrymandering don’t actually say the quiet part loud. Redistricting for the sole purpose of excluding as many non-whites as possible is perfectly legal if politicians never affirmatively state that the only reason they’re doing this is to make sure minorities can’t vote against their racist asses.
This is all part of what the state of South Dakota is doing now. Governor Larry Rhoden was never elected to his post. He was elevated after Kristi Noem was selected to head the DHS by Donald Trump. (Since she’s about as unemployed as any Trump appointee ever gets, I’m sure she wishes she was back running the state of South Dakota… into the ground.) His most recent brush with the electoral process saw him losing handily to Mike Rounds in the 2014 Senate race.
Rhoden actually needs to win an election if he wishes to remain South Dakota’s governor. And all the MAGA fellatio in the world doesn’t mean much when plenty of other MAGA acolytes are running against him.
So, there’s a mixture of things going on here. There’s Rhoden’s (and the state GOP’s) desire to engage with Trump’s election conspiracies — ones that claim (with zero facts in evidence) that a whole lot of undocumented immigrants are voting in state and local elections.
There’s also a nationwide attempt to deter voting by mail, because these votes more often side with the other team.
In response to completely made-up problems, the GOP passed a bill that Rhoden signed that says state residents must prove their citizenship to engage in local elections. If they can’t, they’re only allowed to participate in federal elections.
According to Rhoden and other GOP alarmists, that’s because too many people who aren’t citizens were granted permission to vote, thanks to what was likely nothing more than a clerical error. South Dakota may be small state in terms of population (~950,000 residents as of 2025), but the “problem” this vaguely written law supposedly addressed was even smaller.
Soulek said only one of the 273 noncitizens had ever cast a ballot. That was during the 2016 general election.
Those are the words of the Director of Elections Rachel Soulek, who works out of the Secretary of State’s office. The Secretary of State blamed this on clerical errors by the Department of Public Safety. The DPS provided the data that Governor Rhoden claims to evidence of widespread election fraud by non-citizens.
One illegal ballot. And that was likely an honest misunderstanding, rather than the criminal intent Rhoden and GOP buddies want to pretend it is.
But the law is on the books. Citizenship must be demonstrated to participate in state and local elections. The problem is that no one running these elections seems to agree what is or isn’t acceptable proof of citizenship.
Hughes County Finance Officer Thomas Oliva, who acts as that county’s auditor, said his office is requiring new voters to show the physical driver’s license.
“The main reasoning behind that is because it’s the back of the license. There’s no other identifying information on the back we can tie back to that person, so we felt it’s in the best interest to see the physical card,” Oliva told News Watch.
Haakon County Auditor Stacy Pinney said she has not run into any issues yet with voter registration but also will require new applicants to physically show the driver’s license.
“I’m going to make it a policy in my office that I want to see the actual card. If I have to verify it, I want to see the real deal,” Pinney told News Watch.
Meanwhile, Harding County Auditor Kathy Glines said her office will accept a photocopy of the driver’s license.
“They would have to send a front and back,” Glines told News Watch.
“I hope they would call before sending it by mail,” she added, referring to the limited hours the office is open.
Everyone appears to be making up their own rules because the law — and the Secretary of State’s office — are being deliberately vague about these requirements, especially in relation to absentee voting. And many people in the state may not know that the law only applies to people who have registered to vote after July of last year, so lots of people are going to be presenting IDs to precinct staffers even if they’re not legally required to do so.
This all adds up to exactly what Governor Rhoden and the GOP want: confusion over who is or isn’t allowed to vote, blended with another law passed by Rhoden that allows pretty much anyone to challenge someone else’s eligibility to vote.
The state could offer much-needed clarification. But it won’t.
As early and absentee voting for the primary election gets underway, Scott-Stoltz hopes officials in Pierre can provide more certainty on the registration process for new voters.
“We’re hoping for more clarification from the secretary’s office before the primary and are looking forward to working with the election board,” she said.
The secretary of state’s office didn’t respond to a request for comment by News Watch.
That’s a feature, not a bug. Those in power definitely prefer incumbent voters over new ones, much like incumbent voters prefer incumbents. They want to keep the jobs they have, rather than allow new voters to upset the incumbent apple cart. They all pretend they love the democratic system, but when it’s time latch onto another 2-4 years in power, they work together to reduce the electorate to the votes they can count on.
Filed Under: bigotry, larry rhoden, south dakota, trump administration, voter fraud, voter id law


Comments on “Voter Suppression In South Dakota Is Well Underway, Even Without SCOTUS’s Help”
Conservatives never stopped suppressing voters anywhere. It’s just that now they’ve got extra help from SCOTUS.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
“Bigot” means “we shouldn’t draw districts for racist reasons, apparently.
(btw, SD is so white that none of the recent ruling mattered there, anyway, so you’re just being retarded on purpose in order to pretend others are racist)
But, one did cast a ballot. (that was proven, anyway)
You just want fraud.
Re:
Every accusation is a confession. We know conservatives draw districts for racist reasons, just like they have since they were forced to let black people vote in the first place.
How many citizens are you willing to suppress to stop that single one? Are you willing to apply that same logic to gun control?
Bad-faith fascist cunt.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re:
You absolute retard, there is basically no one to be “racist” against in South Dakota.
Everyone has a right to be armed. Only citizens have a right to vote.
Ergo, you have to check who is a citizen.
lol, you literally make a buncha shit and I’m the “bad faith”.
Fucking retards.
Re: Re: Re:
“It’s okay to be racist if you’re only racist towards a few people…” is a weird argument to make.
Also, about 180,000 non-white residents in the state is a lot of people, so “basically no one” is the bigot math we expect from you. You’re literally erasing people of color here. This is an act of racism. But continue to tell us you’re not racist. “I didn’t say the n-word so it’s not true!”
Not according to the law, no. Toddlers? Convicted criminals?
“Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.”
Read the article. It literally covers the issues relating to checking. Who decides what is valid proof? Racists like you?
Yep, always will be.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:2
Holy fuck you are dumb. There are not enough minorities to make a majority minority district Not by several orders of magnitude. Even if that were legal, which it absolutely is not.
Jesus christ. The racist thing you want isn’t even possible, at all. Please stfu, you retard.
Re: Re: Re:3
Please stfu, you retard.
What are you going to do if I don’t, Fuckface? Call me a ‘retard’ again?
Stupid cunt.
Re: Re: Re:3
Note the strawman you’re fighting with. I didn’t say anything about a majority minority district. We’re talking about conservatives redrawing districts with racist intent (because statistically and demographically that gives them an advantage). You can dilute minority votes in redistricting even if there aren’t enough to make them a majority in a district. And you keep pretending it requires someone to admit they’re being racist for it to be racist. Even if you weren’t intentionally choosing distributions based on race and ethnicity, if your results dilute their representation disproportionately, then it’s still systemically racist regardless of intent.
You don’t actually know what you’re talking about and the smugness with which you declare others stupid only says anything about you.
Re: Re: Re:
False, In the US non citizens are generally forbidden from owning guns.
Any way, the question is “How many citizens are you willing to suppress to stop that single one? Are you willing to apply that same logic to gun control?”
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re:
I bet you love raping your children
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re:
Typical leftist right here, ladies and gentleman.
Re: Re: Re:
Typical person making unproven statement here, ladies and gentlemen. They’re probably also a [insert your rival sports team here] fan and they also [do something you find annoying].
Re:
This strawman is so weak and tired and predictable. We could just write a script to generate this bullshit.
“If we burn someone alive, it will kill their cancer. If you oppose immolating cancer patients, you just want everyone to get cancer!”
“If we don’t put cameras in bathrooms, people might commit crimes in there. If you oppose spying on people in the bathroom, you just want crime!”
The funny thing is that you sound exactly like the people who made absurd, bigoted, misogynist arguments against women’s suffrage, desegregation, et al.
Some anti-suffragists argued that women would neglect children because voting would be a distraction.
How can they claim that non citizens are voting? Didn’t their great leader have all the immigrants thrown out?
Re:
Didn’t their great leader have all the immigrants thrown out?
Nope. He just picked off a bunch of low-hanging fruit to make it seem like he was ‘doing something.’ If he deports all of the immigrants, the rubes are going to have to find someone else to blame for their shitty lots in life, and they’re running out of minorities.
Re: Re:
Moreover, this is South Dakota. If they kicked out ALL the immigrants, an awful lot of farmers would find their crops rotting with nobody to harvest them.
No, they don’t want them ALL kicked out – but they do want ALL of them to be terrified about being kicked out, so they can freely abuse them without risk of losing them.
Why yes, this is terrorism. Thank you for asking.
I believe the universally accepted form of identification is a MAGA hat.