I. Introduction

II. Background

III. Prehistory ... A. 2006 Legislation ... B. 2018 Legislation ... C. BOR [Board of Regents] Policy Changes

IV. Legislative History ... A. Framing the Bill ... B. The House of Representatives ... C. The State Senate

V. Analysis ... A. The Chicago Statement ... B. Speech Zones ... C. Student Group Funding and Free Exercise ... D. Intellectual Diversity ... E. Harassment ... F. Developing a Dakota Diversity Model

VI. Conclusion

During the winter of 2019 and after two years of debate, South Dakota became the first state in the nation to adopt legislation promoting intellectual diversity at its state universities. House Bill 1087 was adopted in the wake of growing public concern about American universities becoming too ideologically one-sided and too prone to censorship and restrictions on free speech. Much of the friction underlying the framing and passage of H.B. 1087 involved disagreements between state legislators and the South Dakota Board of Regents (BOR), which is the body appointed by the governor to oversee the state university system and which generally seeks to maintain its autonomy. Despite this friction and many questions of authority arising from it, the South Dakota Supreme Court has concluded that the BOR is subject to the control of the legislature. This Article explains the legislative history behind H.B. 1087, discusses the accompanying legal questions raised by its passage, and highlights the new model of diversity created by H.B. 1087. Given the prominence of the public policy issues underlying H.B. 1087, other states are likely to follow suit with similar legislative debates and laws.