HomeAI LawsSouth DakotaPierre

AI Laws in Pierre, South Dakota

As of 2026-07-02, AI Laws USA tracks 13 AI rules that apply to people and businesses in Pierre, South Dakota: 10+ federal protections, 3 South Dakota state-level rules (no Pierre-specific ordinances are indexed yet). Coverage is strongest on deepfakes, AI-generated images, biometric data, and consumer data privacy. 3 of these rules are already in effect. Each entry below links to its official source.

Pierre local AI rules (and Hughes County)

No city- or county-specific AI ordinances are currently indexed for Pierre, South Dakota.

  1. Honest gap: We don't currently index any Pierre-specific AI ordinances. Federal and South Dakota state rules still apply throughout the city. Have we missed something? Email [email protected].

South Dakota-level AI rules

3 South Dakota state rules apply to residents and businesses in Pierre. Sorted strongest first.

  1. In effect Limited protection

    SD AI CSAM Law

    South Dakota · Effective 2024-02-13 · 2024 SD SB 79

    South Dakota expanded its child pornography statutes to explicitly cover AI-generated and deepfake sexual imagery involving minors — including fully synthetic images where no real child was used.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  2. In effect Limited protection

    SD Election Deepfake Law

    South Dakota · Effective 2025-07-01 · SD SB 164 (2025); signed Mar. 31, 2025; eff. July 1, 2025

    South Dakota requires that intentionally harmful, unlabeled AI deepfakes of politicians distributed within 90 days of an election carry an AI-manipulation disclosure; violators face civil and criminal liability. Broadcasters, newspapers, websites, and radio stations are exempt, as are satire and parody.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  3. In effect Moderate protection

    NBDC Genomic Sovereignty

    Native BioData Consortium · Effective 2018-01-01 · Native BioData Consortium governance protocols (est. 2018)

    First U.S. Indigenous-led biorepository. Keeps Indigenous biological samples and derived genomic data under Indigenous governance and consent, with privacy-preserving protocols to prevent extractive AI/genomic research without tribal authorization. Based on the Cheyenne River Sioux Reservation in South Dakota.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

Full South Dakota jurisdiction page →

Federal AI rules that apply in Pierre, South Dakota

These federal protections apply everywhere in the United States, including Pierre, South Dakota. Showing the 10 strongest and most recent.

  1. In effect Stronger protection

    Bartz v. Anthropic

    N.D. Cal. · Effective 2025-09-05 · Bartz v. Anthropic PBC, No. 3:24-cv-05417 (N.D. Cal.)

    Authors Andrea Bartz, Charles Graeber, and Kirk Wallace Johnson sued Anthropic over its use of pirated-book datasets to train Claude. In June 2025 Judge William Alsup ruled that training on lawfully purchased books was fair use. The piracy claims (LibGen ingestion) were not adjudicated to a final ruling — they proceeded toward settlement. In September 2025 Anthropic agreed to a $1.5 billion class settlement, though Judge Alsup denied preliminary approval without prejudice pending additional information on the claims protocol and attorney fees.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  2. In effect Stronger protection

    Banner v. Tesla (Autopilot)

    S.D. Fla. · Effective 2025-08-01 · Benavides v. Tesla, Inc., No. 1:21-cv-21940 (S.D. Fla. Aug. 1, 2025)

    A Florida federal jury found Tesla 33% liable in August 2025 for the 2019 death of Naibel Benavides Leon, in a crash involving Autopilot. The verdict awarded $243M (later reduced to ~$220M) — the first Autopilot wrongful-death verdict against Tesla.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  3. In effect Stronger protection

    COPPA + 2025 Rule (childrens data)

    United States · Effective 2025-06-23 · 15 U.S.C. §§ 6501–6506; 16 C.F.R. Part 312

    COPPA requires online services aimed at children under 13 to get verifiable parental consent before collecting kids' personal data. The 2025 rule update — fully in effect since April 22, 2026 — adds biometric identifiers (like face templates and voiceprints, which matter for AI tools), requires separate parental consent before sharing children's data for targeted advertising, and tightens data retention limits.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  4. In effect Stronger protection

    TAKE IT DOWN Act

    United States · Effective 2025-05-19 · Pub. L. No. 119-12 (S. 146)

    Makes it a federal crime to knowingly publish intimate images of someone without consent, including AI-generated deepfakes. Social media and similar platforms must give victims a way to request removal and must take the content (and known copies) down within 48 hours. The platform removal requirement became enforceable May 19, 2026, and the FTC has already begun enforcement.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  5. Blocked / in litigation Stronger protection

    NetChoice v. Yost (Ohio)

    S.D. Ohio · Effective 2025-04-16 · NetChoice, LLC v. Yost, No. 2:24-cv-00047 (S.D. Ohio Apr. 16, 2025)

    Ohio's Social Media Parental Notification Act — requiring parental consent for minors' social-media use, including algorithmic feeds — was preliminarily enjoined on February 12, 2024, then permanently enjoined on April 16, 2025 when the district court granted summary judgment for NetChoice. The state appealed to the Sixth Circuit, which vacated the district court's injunction in 2026.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  6. In effect Stronger protection

    Thaler v. Perlmutter (Copyright)

    D.C. Cir. · Effective 2025-03-18 · Thaler v. Perlmutter, 130 F.4th 1039 (D.C. Cir. 2025)

    The companion copyright case: Stephen Thaler sought to register a copyright with 'Creativity Machine' (his AI) as the author. The D.C. Circuit affirmed in March 2025 that the Copyright Act's human-authorship requirement is dispositive as a matter of statutory law. AI cannot be a copyright author under U.S. law.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  7. In effect Stronger protection

    Thomson Reuters v. Ross

    D. Del. · Effective 2025-02-11 · Thomson Reuters Enterprise Centre GmbH v. Ross Intelligence, Inc., 694 F. Supp. 3d 467 (D. Del. 2025)

    Thomson Reuters sued legal-research startup Ross Intelligence in 2020 for copying Westlaw headnotes to train a competing AI legal-research tool. In February 2025, Judge Stephanos Bibas (sitting by designation) granted summary judgment to Thomson Reuters on direct copyright infringement and rejected Ross's fair-use defense — the first definitive U.S. ruling on AI-training fair use. The 2023 jury trial verdict had been deadlocked; the 2025 ruling resolved liability.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  8. In effect Stronger protection

    Louis v. SafeRent

    D. Mass. · Effective 2024-11-20 · Louis v. SafeRent Solutions, LLC, No. 1:22-cv-10800 (D. Mass.)

    SafeRent agreed in November 2024 to a $2.275M settlement and a five-year ban on using its 'SafeRent Score' for housing-voucher applicants, after a class action alleged its AI tenant-screening tool systematically denied housing to Black and Hispanic Section 8 voucher holders. The first major AI tenant-screening Fair Housing Act settlement.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  9. In effect Stronger protection

    FTC Impersonation Rule (AI)

    United States · Effective 2024-04-01 · 16 C.F.R. Part 461; 89 Fed. Reg. 15017

    The FTC's Impersonation Rule lets the agency directly sue scammers who pretend to be a government agency or a real business — including those who use AI-cloned voices or generated images to do so. Civil penalties can reach $53,088 per violation. The FTC also issued a supplemental notice in February 2024 proposing to extend the rule to all individual impersonation.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  10. In effect Stronger protection

    TCPA (AI voice calls)

    United States · Effective 2024-02-08 · 47 U.S.C. § 227; FCC 24-17

    Robocalls using AI-cloned or AI-generated voices are treated like other 'artificial voice' calls: callers need your prior express consent, must identify themselves, and must offer opt-outs for telemarketing. You can personally sue violators for $500 to $1,500 per illegal call.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

See all federal AI rules →

Frequently asked questions about AI laws in Pierre, South Dakota

Are there AI laws in Pierre, South Dakota?
Pierre, South Dakota does not have any city-specific AI ordinances indexed in our database. However, 3 South Dakota state-level rules and federal AI protections fully apply within the city limits. See the South Dakota jurisdiction page for the full state-level breakdown.
What federal AI rules apply in Pierre?
Every federal AI protection in our index applies in Pierre, South Dakota. The highest-strength federal rules currently include Bartz v. Anthropic, Banner v. Tesla (Autopilot), COPPA + 2025 Rule (childrens data). 10+ federal entries are tracked in total.
Does South Dakota have an AI privacy law?
South Dakota has 1 privacy- or automated-decision-related AI rule in our index, including NBDC Genomic Sovereignty. These apply to residents of Pierre.
Are deepfakes illegal in South Dakota?
South Dakota has 2 deepfake- or AI-image-related laws in our index, including SD AI CSAM Law and SD Election Deepfake Law. Additionally, the federal TAKE IT DOWN Act covers non-consensual intimate-image deepfakes nationwide.
Can my employer use AI to screen me for jobs in Pierre?
Pierre, South Dakota has no AI-employment-screening-specific rule in our index. Federal Title VII, ADA, and EEOC guidance still apply, plus any general South Dakota anti-discrimination statutes.
How do I report an AI law violation in Pierre?
Most AI rules are enforced by an agency listed on each individual entry. For South Dakota state laws, the South Dakota Attorney General's office is the usual starting point. For federal AI rules, file complaints with the relevant federal agency (FTC, EEOC, HUD, CFPB, etc.) named on each protection entry. We also accept tips at [email protected].
Are facial recognition cameras allowed in Pierre?
Facial-recognition use in Pierre, South Dakota is addressed by NBDC Genomic Sovereignty. See those entries for what is allowed, who must comply, and enforcement details.
Is Pierre regulated by South Dakota's consumer privacy act?
Yes. South Dakota state laws apply uniformly to residents and businesses operating in Pierre. See the South Dakota jurisdiction page for the complete list of consumer-protection and privacy rules.

Have we missed an AI rule in Pierre?

This page is generated from our open civic dataset. If you know of a Pierre ordinance, county rule, or local enforcement action we should add, email [email protected] or submit a correction. Every entry must include a verifiable source.