South Dakota Governor Vetoes Bill to Ban Cell-Cultivated Protein

Rhoden proposes a five-year moratorium instead to allow further study and legal challenges to unfold

Published on Feb. 11, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

South Dakota Governor Larry Rhoden has vetoed a bill that would have banned the sale of cell-cultivated protein products in the state. The bill, HB 1077, passed both the state House and Senate before being vetoed by Rhoden, who cited concerns about setting a dangerous precedent and potential legal challenges. Rhoden has proposed a five-year temporary moratorium instead to allow for further study and pending litigation in other states to unfold.

Why it matters

The veto and proposed moratorium highlight the ongoing debate around cell-cultivated protein, which some see as a threat to traditional livestock agriculture. Supporters of the ban argued it was needed to protect consumers and the traditional livestock sector, while opponents warned it could open the state up to legal challenges and retaliation from other states. The outcome could set an important precedent for how states approach regulating these emerging food products.

The details

HB 1077 would have added cell-cultivated protein to the list of adulterated food products in South Dakota, effectively banning its sale. In his veto letter, Rhoden said the bill "departs from [South Dakota's] values by imposing a permanent ban on a category of lawful, federally regulated food products." Instead, Rhoden proposed a five-year temporary moratorium to allow for further study and pending litigation in other states to unfold. The South Dakota Cattlemen's Association opposed the original bill, fearing it could set a dangerous precedent and lead to retaliation from other states.

  • On February 3, 2026, the bill was presented to the Senate's Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee.
  • On February 10, 2026, Governor Rhoden vetoed the bill.
  • Rhoden has proposed amending Senate Bill 124 to include a five-year temporary moratorium on cell-cultivated protein products.

The players

Larry Rhoden

The Governor of South Dakota who vetoed HB 1077 and proposed a five-year temporary moratorium instead.

Taya Runyan

The executive director and lobbyist for the South Dakota Cattlemen's Association, which opposed HB 1077.

Julie Auch

A Republican state representative who sponsored HB 1077, arguing cell-cultivated protein is "fake meat" that has not been properly studied.

Jana Hunt

A Republican state representative who supported HB 1077, arguing the research is being funded by large meat packers as a way to undermine independent cattle ranchers.

South Dakota Stockgrowers Association

An agricultural group that supported HB 1077 but respects the governor's veto and will support the proposed five-year moratorium.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“As a lifelong rancher, I understand agricultural producers take pride in raising our food, and we've never been afraid of competition in that regard. South Dakota's values allow our ag producers to thrive in a competitive national and global economy. House Bill 1077 departs from those values by imposing a permanent ban on a category of lawful, federally regulated food products. While you won't catch me eating these products, it's against our values to ban products just because we don't like them.”

— Larry Rhoden, Governor of South Dakota (agweek.com)

“When you take a product that is otherwise legally allowed, cell-cultured protein or anything else that's regulated and inspected and put a ban on it, that's setting a really dangerous precedent that that's OK to ban something that we don't like.”

— Taya Runyan, Executive Director, South Dakota Cattlemen's Association (agweek.com)

“Cell-cultivated protein is not only fake meat, but it has not been properly studied or proven to be safe or healthy for human consumption. Counties and states have banned this product to protect not only the consumer, but the traditional livestock sector in their state.”

— Julie Auch, Republican State Representative (agweek.com)

What’s next

Rhoden has proposed amending Senate Bill 124 to include a five-year temporary moratorium on cell-cultivated protein products, which would allow for further study and pending legal challenges in other states to unfold.

The takeaway

The veto of the cell-cultivated protein ban in South Dakota highlights the complex and evolving debate around these emerging food products. While some see them as a threat to traditional agriculture, others warn that outright bans could open states up to legal challenges and retaliation. The proposed temporary moratorium represents a compromise approach that aims to balance these competing concerns.