Secretary of State Implements Legal Firewall

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Monday, March 12, 2018
CONTACT: Tom Deadrick at (605) 773-3537 or Tom.Deadrick@state.sd.us

PIERRE, S.D. – The Office of the Secretary of State Shantel Krebs has implemented a legal firewall separating Secretary Krebs from any information pertaining to the 2018 United States House of Representatives election.

As a candidate for the position, Secretary Krebs instituted the policy to protect the integrity of her office and the election process. The policy, effective as of February 28, 2018, has been agreed to and signed by all office employees.

For more detailed information about the policy, visit: https://sdsos.gov/elections-voting/upcoming-elections/general-information/personnel-security-firewall-policy.aspx

#

I finally had a few minutes after work to get the embed link..  In case you wanted to read it, here’s the South Dakota Republican Party newsletter that’s starting to hit mailboxes across the state:

Republican Rally March 2018 Newsletter on Scribd

Jackley Convenes Economic Round Table in Kimball

KIMBALL, SD: Attorney General Marty Jackley met with business and community leaders from Kimball, Chamberlain and White Lake today for the second in a series of economic round tables he’s holding around the state.

“The best ideas come from the people who build businesses, work every day to make payroll and manage our hometowns,” Jackley said. “Today’s conversation was yet another reminder that not all South Dakota towns are facing the same challenges, which is why we’re trying to meet people in a diverse range of communities on our tour.”

The round table gathered leaders from four different counties and included mayors, county commissioners, business owners, regional planners, school administrators and law enforcement.

Dan and Corinne Overweg, owners of Overweg Repair on Main Street, were two of the business owners in attendance. Their business on Main Street has served Kimball for 32 years, and they gave Jackley a tour of their establishment following the round table.

“The Overwegs employ 10 people and have provided tremendous service for Kimball and the surrounding area, but they told me that government has put roadblocks in their way,” Jackley said. “As small business owners, they’ve been forced to confront the towering costs imposed by Obamacare, a law that I’ve continued to fight as South Dakota’s attorney general.”

Jackley will continue his economic round table tour in De Smet on Wednesday, followed by a stop in Brookings that evening.

Non-Partisan Redistricting Ballot Question Petition Rejected by Secretary of State

PIERRE, S.D. – Today, Secretary of State Shantel Krebs announced that the petition submitted for an initiated amendment to the South Dakota Constitution providing for state legislative redistricting by a commission was rejected by her office.

“An Initiated Constitutional Amendment requires 27,741 valid signatures in order to be placed on the ballot,” stated Secretary Krebs. “This initiated constitutional amendment petition included 33,980 signatures. We reviewed a random sample of signatures and only 74.37 percent (33,980 x 74.3733% = 25,272 valid signatures, not meeting the 27,741 signature requirement) were found to be valid.”

A rejected petition cannot be challenged to the office of the Secretary of State, however that does not prohibit a citizen from challenging the denial of a ballot question petition in circuit court.

The remaining three ballot question petitions will be reviewed by the Secretary of State’s office in the order in which they were received.

The South Dakota Legislature submitted three constitutional amendments to the voters during the 2018 Legislative Session including:

• SJR 1 (Constitutional Amendment X – to be placed on the General Election Ballot) an amendment to the Constitution of the State of South Dakota, relating to amendments to the Constitution,
• HJR 1004 (Constitutional Amendment Y – to be placed on the Primary Election Ballot) an amendment to the Constitution of the State of South Dakota, to revise certain provisions relating to the rights of crime victims; and
• HJR 1006 (Constitutional Amendment Z – to be placed on the General Election Ballot) an amendment to the Constitution of the State of South Dakota, relating to amendments to the Constitution.

South Dakota citizens have the ability to submit a referendum petition concerning laws passed during the 2018 Legislative session.

For more detailed information on potential 2018 Ballot Questions, click here.

###

Large Crowds Greet Jackley at West River Office Grand Opening

RAPID CITY, SD: In a sign of growing momentum for Attorney General Marty Jackley’s campaign for governor, large crowds gathered Friday for the Grand Opening of his West River Office in Rapid City.

“We’re incredibly humbled by the turnout,” Jackley said. “The line of supporters stretched all the way out the door, which tells me that people are excited for the positive, ideas-based campaign we’ve decided to run.”

More than 130 people attended the office opening, which marks the beginning of the campaign’s grassroots activity on the western side of the state.

“This campaign is about meeting people in their own hometowns, listening to their ideas and asking them how I can be an effective governor for South Dakota,” Jackley said. “The people of our state continue to inspire me, and we look forward to carrying Friday’s momentum into the coming days and weeks of this campaign.”

Jackley’s tour of the state will continue this week with economic round tables featuring leaders from Chamberlain, Kimball, White Lake and De Smet.

A facebook live video of Friday’s crowd can be viewed here.

-30-

Straight from my mailbox, SDGOP has newsletter out:

@sdgop Newsletter in mailboxes today. pic.twitter.com/uFv39oggRX

— Pat Powers (@SoDakCampaigns) March 12, 2018

Coming off of the heels of her book, apparently former Republican US Senate Candidate Annette Bosworth is now in the business of trying to hawk a diet program, according to website metonelife.com:

No registration information on the website is available publicly, although the phone number appears to be a Minnesota phone number.

And I suspect that this is the first time a former South Dakota US Senate Candidate has used the hashtag #PeeAKetone.

Politico Magazine is reporting an interesting story about Chinese government-run educational institutes which are opening on college campuses nationwide. and that includes one here in South Dakota at Northern State University:

But the Confucius Institutes’ goals are a little less wholesome and edifying than they sound—and this is by the Chinese government’s own account. A 2011 speech by a standing member of the Politburo in Beijing laid out the case: “The Confucius Institute is an appealing brand for expanding our culture abroad,” Li Changchun said. “It has made an important contribution toward improving our soft power. The ‘Confucius’ brand has a natural attractiveness. Using the excuse of teaching Chinese language, everything looks reasonable and logical.”

Li, it now seems, was right to exult. More than a decade after they were created, Confucius Institutes have sprouted up at more than 500 college campuses worldwide, with more than 100 of them in the United States—including at The George Washington University, the University of Michigan and the University of Iowa. Overseen by a branch of the Chinese Ministry of Education known colloquially as Hanban, the institutes are part of a broader propaganda initiative that the Chinese government is pumping an estimated $10 billion into annually, and they have only been bolstered by growing interest in China among American college students.

Yet along with their growth have come consistent questions about whether the institutes belong on campuses that profess to promote free inquiry. Confucius Institutes teach a very particular, Beijing-approved version of Chinese culture and history: one that ignores concerns over human rights, for example, and teaches that Taiwan and Tibet indisputably belong to Mainland China. Take it from the aforementioned Li, who also said in 2009 that Confucius Institutes are an “important part of China’s overseas propaganda set-up.” Critics also charge that the centers have led to a climate of self-censorship on campuses that play host to them.

and…

Instead, Confucius Institutes continue their forward march. In 2015, they opened at Tufts University, New Jersey City University, Southern Utah University and Northern State University in South Dakota.

and..

It seems that Beijing probed, and found a weakness: money. It may be intellectually indefensible for universities to host Confucius Institutes, but at a time of reduced funding, it makes eminent sense. How ironic that the ostensibly communist Chinese seem to understand financial imperatives better than we Yankees do.

Read it all here in Politico Magazine.

Well.. that’s not something I expected to read on a Sunday afternoon. Chinese Government Propaganda institutes at Northern State University. I’d say it sounds like a Lora Hubbel campaign line, but it’s actually coming from Politico Magazine.

If you want to see for yourself….

…click here to visit NSU’s information on the Confucius Institute.

As the writer of a political website, I do like to see it when I receive a notice of a trackback, meaning I see it when someone cites something I’ve written.  Today, I saw notice of a link from an attorney who is apparently representing the USD Law School Professor who has some strong positions against Trophy Hunting.

If you recall:

I simply thought I would let you know that my article on “trophy hunting” – the hunting for “sport” of rare species – has now been published.  You can download it from here, should you like to see it: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2822111 .  Feel free to share that link others.

 I advocate against continuing the practice of trophy hunting.  I address the issue from, mainly, a contracts point of view, arguing that the practice can modernly be held unenforceable under the common law for reasons of public policy (public opinion has, in recent years, turned against killing very rare animals). 

Read that here…

As we’re finding out today, predictably, that article generated a considerable amount of controversy, and as the professor’s attorney claims, may have played a role in the denial of tenure:

Many TFL readers may know Associate Professor Myanna Dellinger, or be familiar with her work.  Myanna is the Editor-in-Chief of the ContractsProfBlog and a rising star in legal academia. She is the creator of the Global Energy and Environmental Law podcast (also available on iTunes), a frequent speaker at academic symposia and author of a dozen law review articles and many other publications.

and…

Although it is not entirely clear why the Provost and President are so opposed to Myanna receiving tenure, there have been some disturbing signs that there are other factors at play in Myanna’s case beyond these administrators’ professed belief that lateral hires should not be promoted on the same schedule as homegrown faculty members.  In 2016, Myanna published an article in the Columbia Journal of Environmental Law Trophy Hunting Contracts – Unenforceable for Reasons of Public Policy, 41 Colum. J. Envtl. L. (2016) (SSRN Link) that was highly critical of trophy hunting.  Although the article was very well-received in the legal academy, the article was very controversial in South Dakota, where hunting, including big-game hunting, is still a popular activity.   The article ignited considerable controversy in South Dakota and the law school was criticized for allowing Myanna to publish it. Rather than encouraging Professor Dellinger’s colleagues to come to her support, the law faculty were directed not share their views externally and not to respond to comments posted on the USD Law listserv.  The Provost’s unsuccessful efforts to demote Myanna began shortly thereafter.

and…

We are hopeful of a positive outcome in the Court.  Certainly the facts and the law are on Myanna’s side.  Unfortunately, Myanna’s extended legal battles to defend her rights have put a severe financial strain on her.  USD is one of the lowest-paying law schools in the country (even third year Associate Professors like Myanna are still paid under six figures) so there is not a lot left over for legal fees.  Although I have done all of my work on the case either pro bono or at a deeply discounted rate, it is still a major struggle for Myanna to pay for the ongoing fees and costs of litigation.   Accordingly, Myanna has set up a Legal Defense Fund with Go Fund Me.  This fund will be used to pay for court costs (filing fees, pro hac vice fee, etc.), and past, present and future legal fees.  If the Court orders a hearing in the case, I have promised Myanna to represent her at the hearing pro bono, but the fund would be used to pay for my travel expenses to South Dakota, which is not the cheapest place to get to.  If you have a few bucks to spare and would like to support Myanna, please consider donating to the fund.

Read it here.

And as noted by Professor Dellinger herself at GoFundMe, she offers a few theories as to why they don’t want to give her tenure. As she goes into her spiel as to why people should help her raise the $8000 she’s seeking to sue the USD Law School:

Why are the Provost and President so opposed to me getting tenure?  Could it be because I wrote a law review article that was critical of the practice of trophy hunting, which created a local firestorm in this staunchly pro-hunting state?  Could it be because I made a presentation to the Academic Senate about the University’s arbitrary policies on prior service credit?  Could it be because I am an “outsider”?  – Or a female?  Only they know the real reasons.  But whatever their true motivations may be, both the Provost and the President have made it clear that they are opposed to my getting tenure this year. Since they know they don’t have any valid basis to deny me tenure on the merits, they have resorted to procedural mechanisms to try to block me.

As you can imagine, all these legal battles are not cheap.  I have an excellent attorney.  He’s donated dozens of hours of work on the case and is charging me a fraction of his usual rate.  But between last year’s fight to keep my title and this year’s tenure fight, I have already spent over $10,000 just in attorney fees, and this fight is far from over.  There are court filing fees, travel expenses and more attorney fees to come, and frankly, I can’t afford it.  It doesn’t help that the University of South Dakota pays its law professors among the least in the nation.

Read that here.

The questions she raises as she goes into her plea for cash regarding her denial for tenure ask if it is because she advocates against hunting, questioning if it’s because she’s “an outsider,” or because she’s “a woman?”  And complains that USD “pays its law professors among the least in the nation.”

I know the reaction of some USD Law School Alumni was NOT very positive towards the professor’s writings to “ban hunting as against public policy,” and calling “it’s participants part of a “shadowy subculture.”

With the lawsuit demanding tenure, I doubt the professor isn’t going to change their mind any time soon.