NetChoice urged Governor Larry Rhoden to veto South Dakota Senate Bill 111. While we support the goals of a competitive online ecosystem and consumer data control, we argue that this bill’s mandate for “interoperability interfaces” would inadvertently compromise the privacy and security of South Dakotans by creating “backdoors” exploitable by bad actors. Furthermore, we contend that SB 111 would stifle innovation by freezing security standards, degrade the unique user experiences of distinct social platforms and face insurmountable constitutional hurdles—including First Amendment and Takings Clause concerns.
NetChoice Veto Request on South Dakota SB 111
March 6, 2026
The Honorable Larry Rhoden
Governor of South Dakota
500 East Capitol Avenue
Pierre, South Dakota 57501
Dear Governor Rhoden:
NetChoice, a national trade association working to make the Internet safe for free enterprise and free expression, respectfully urges you to veto Senate Bill 111. While we share the Legislature’s desire for a competitive online ecosystem and recognize the importance of consumer control over personal data, we believe this bill, in its current form, will degrade user privacy, introduce serious cybersecurity vulnerabilities, break the consumer experience, and violate the Constitution of the United States.
The Bill Compromises the Safety, Security, and Privacy of South Dakotans
Our primary concern is that SB 111 will compromise the safety, security, and privacy of South Dakota residents. By mandating that social media companies with more than one hundred million active monthly users implement “transparent, third-party-accessible interoperability interface[s],” the State would effectively require these companies to build and maintain open entry points into their systems. While “interoperability” sounds like a helpful standard, in this context it mandates a backdoor for data harvesting. It is a common refrain among cybersecurity experts that once a backdoor is created where it did not otherwise exist, it is not just there for the good guys—it is inherently a new vulnerability exploitable by bad actors as well.
The requirement under Section 5 to export “social graph” data creates an especially significant consent and privacy problem. A user’s social graph encompasses not only that individual’s connections and interactions but also the private data of every other person in their network. If just one person in a user’s network migrates to a less secure, unvetted platform, they take their interaction history with them. This means a third-party consumer’s private data could be exposed to the security standards of a service they never trusted and never signed up for, effectively dragging everyone down to the lowest common denominator of security.
Although Section 5 includes a provision permitting companies to impose “reasonable terms” on transfers to ensure privacy and security, this safeguard is inadequate. The bill simultaneously requires that such terms must not “unfairly preference” the originating service’s own platform, creating an irreconcilable tension between meaningful security protections and the bill’s openness mandate.
The Bill Freezes Security Standards and Impedes Innovation
SB 111 creates a perverse incentive structure that freezes security standards in time. Platforms may be forced to delay or abandon advanced encryption and safety upgrades simply because those improvements are incompatible with the mandated interoperability protocols. The bill effectively prioritizes static regulatory compliance over the dynamic ability of companies to innovate against ever-evolving cyber threats. At a time when sophisticated cyberattacks are growing more frequent and more damaging, South Dakota should not be tying the hands of the very companies responsible for protecting its residents’ data.
The Bill Misunderstands How Consumers Use Social Media
SB 111 fundamentally misunderstands how users engage online. It operates on the flawed premise that all social networks are interchangeable utilities. But users intentionally treat them as distinct communities. People curate different profiles for different audiences—they do not want their professional network on LinkedIn merging with their private family photos on Instagram, or their neighborhood watch discussions on Nextdoor bleeding into public political debates found on X. By treating these distinct contexts as obstacles to be removed, the bill homogenizes the internet. It forces diverse platforms to act like “dumb pipes,” thereby actually reducing consumer choice rather than expanding it.
The Bill Faces Insurmountable Constitutional Hurdles
SB 111 raises multiple federal constitutional concerns that would expose the State to costly and likely unsuccessful litigation. As the United States Supreme Court affirmed in Moody v. NetChoice (2024), platforms have a First Amendment right to curate content and design their services as they see fit. Forcing a platform to carry the data, code, or content of a competitor through mandated interoperability is a form of compelled speech. Moreover, requiring companies to hand over proprietary technology and user data to rivals without compensation raises serious Takings Clause concerns under the Fifth Amendment.
Combined with the Dormant Commerce Clause issues raised by creating a state-specific technical mandate on fundamentally interstate services such as online social media platforms, this bill is legally compromised from multiple directions. Signing it into law would invite immediate legal challenge and impose significant litigation costs on the State.
For these reasons, we respectfully urge you to protect the privacy, security and constitutional rights of South Dakotans by vetoing Senate Bill 111. NetChoice remains committed to working with your office and the Legislature on targeted, constitutionally sound approaches to data portability and consumer empowerment that do not create the serious risks outlined above.
Sincerely,
Patrick Hedger
Director of Policy, NetChoice (The views of NetChoice expressed here do not necessarily represent the views of all NetChoice members.)
NetChoice is a trade association that works to protect free expression and promote free enterprise online.