After HB 1217 fails in the House, Governor Noem issues 2 executive orders

As promised, after the House of Representatives spent their time pontificating, and failed to fix House Bill 1217, Governor Kristi Noem stepped in, and has issued 2 executive orders to ensure that women’s sports are going to be protected in South Dakota:

2021-05 by Pat Powers on Scribd

2021-06 by Pat Powers on Scribd

24 thoughts on “After HB 1217 fails in the House, Governor Noem issues 2 executive orders”

  1. Governor Biden…don’t like legislation so she issues EO….my God as a Republican she is such a hypocrite!

    1. Noem is all over the place, folds when threaten by NCAA and then when she finds out Republicans don’t like she folded she issues executives orders because she still campaigning for the next job. She is turning out to be a horrible governor.

  2. I ask all the supporters of fair competition for girl sports, what is missing from this?

    And then I ask all the deceptive sponsors: why did you put in stuff which is unrelated to fairness of competition for girl athletes?

    1. Yes. That point exactly! It was for the state to lose in court and the resulting fallout. A lot of good-intentioned people were being played by the other side. Happens more often than any of us care to admit.

  3. At the end of the day, girls will play girls sports exclusively and women will play womens’ sports exclusively now, by executive order. The purpose of HB 1217 has been served for the short term and the codifying of these protections can be accomplished soon with more time for proper consideration.

    1. I believe the EO is an excellent temporary tool that needs to be codified into law. Perhaps a chance to examine the language of the bill that can pass lawsuits is not such a bad idea.

  4. I didn’t realize this was such a problem in our state with boys who want to compete in girls sports. Are that many boys who want to win at all costs that they compete against girls? How many times is this happening? We went to out grandchildren’s HS events but did not see any boys in the girls events.

    1. There has been 1, yes 1, instance of this that the SDHSAA has approved since the policy has been in place. I believe Sen Schoenbeck (I may be wrong) said it best, “This bill is a solution in search of a problem.”. The bill should have had a veto, plain and simple. The legislators that did end up voting no on the override did the right thing. Many in the state enjoy the Summit League tournament, I’m sure the Aberdeen community enjoyed the recent Division II tournament, and the list could go on.

    2. It rarely happens. That’s why this bill from “small government” GOP members is so weird. They are making a law for a problem that doesn’t really exist.

      1. It’s not about hw many times this has or hasn’t happened. This bill was all about messaging to voters.
        Politicians that discuss policy and ideas don’t win elections. They need an issue that people can relate to emotionally. It used to be opposing same sex marriage. That ship sailed due to SCOTUS. So it’s not surprising that the emotions had to be redirected elsewhere.

          1. Agreed. But people gotta hate on someone. It’s not ok to hate on same sex couples anymore so they think it’s ok to hate on transgender individuals. There will always be something
            In the early 1800s, people used to hate on the Irish, then it was the Chinese, then the Italians. It never ends. It is human nature ..doesn’t make it right,, but it never changes

  5. An executive order is not meant to be a suggestion only, correct?? The word “should” as written in the “order” would be” will or shall” IF it were to be an order.

  6. Is it true that pro-life legislators and lobbyists were disinvited to bill signings because of disagreements over this issue?

      1. Big post on Tamara Gove’s facebook about this happening. Is Rep. Fred Deutsch also being disinvited to bill signings.

    1. 1) This is not a law. It is an exective order. By definition, they are different. Significantly different.

      2) Whether “legal” and “enforceable” in court or not, the Executive Order has the intended effect. Do you really think the High School Athletic Association will approve participation contrary to the EO knowing there is a special session coming? Not in a million years.

      1. I mean, given the fact that the Athletic Association already had rules regarding this issue BEFORE all this performative BS in Pierre started happening, I suspect literally nothing will change. So, cool?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.