South Dakota Moves to Restrict Eminent Domain on November Ballot

Proposed constitutional amendment would limit use of eminent domain for economic development or increased tax revenue

Jan. 28, 2026 at 3:55pm

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

The South Dakota House has passed a measure that would ask voters to approve a constitutional amendment restricting the use of eminent domain in the state. The proposed amendment would prohibit the use of eminent domain solely to promote economic development or increase tax revenue without providing a clear public use. The measure now moves to the state Senate and, if approved, would be on the November 2026 ballot for voters to decide.

Why it matters

This proposed amendment is a response to a controversial multi-state carbon capture pipeline project that would pass through eastern South Dakota. Supporters say the measure would strengthen existing laws banning eminent domain for such pipeline projects, while critics argue the language is too vague and could inadvertently enshrine eminent domain rights for economic development purposes.

The details

The legislation, introduced by Republican Rep. Spencer Gosch, passed the state House by a 62-5 vote. It would amend the state constitution to clarify that eminent domain 'may not be exercised for the purpose of transferring private property to a non-governmental entity solely to promote economic development or increase tax revenue without the provision of a public use.' Supporters say this would protect property owners, while critics worry the language is too broad and could open the door for future abuse of eminent domain.

  • The measure passed the state House on January 27, 2026.
  • The measure will now be considered by the state Senate.
  • If approved by the Senate, the proposed constitutional amendment would be on the November 3, 2026 general election ballot for voters to decide.

The players

Spencer Gosch

Republican state Representative who introduced the legislation to restrict eminent domain.

John Hughes

Republican state Representative who expressed concerns about the vague language of the proposed amendment.

Summit Carbon Solutions

Company proposing a multi-state carbon capture pipeline project that would pass through eastern South Dakota, sparking debate over eminent domain.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“We are helping property owners in the state of South Dakota maintain their rights on their property by saying, 'No, you cannot take my property for economic development or increased tax revenue purposes.'”

— Spencer Gosch, State Representative

“To now enshrine the ability to take private property for purposes of economic development or increasing tax revenue, so long as that you have a public use, wow, I can't go there.”

— John Hughes, State Representative

What’s next

If the South Dakota Senate also approves the measure, it will go to voters in the November 3, 2026 general election.

The takeaway

This proposed constitutional amendment reflects ongoing tensions in South Dakota over the use of eminent domain, particularly in relation to large-scale infrastructure projects like the carbon capture pipeline. The measure aims to limit eminent domain for economic development, but critics argue the language is too broad and could have unintended consequences.