South Dakota: AI rules for lawyers

What this means for lawyers

No South Dakota Supreme Court rule, circuit rule or State Bar ethics opinion on generative AI was found. Competence, confidentiality, candour to the tribunal and communication with the client still come from the Rules of Professional Conduct.

Rule 1.1, as published, is the general competence rule. The official text has no technology-competence comment and does not mention artificial intelligence.

In the U.S. District Court for the District of South Dakota, the civil local rules posted as current (Eighth Circuit Judicial Council order of 24 February 2025) and the criminal local-rules index do not contain an artificial-intelligence rule.

A proposal dated 20 October 2025 (Civ. LR 7.2 and Crim. LR 12.2, identical text) would make the lawyer or self-represented party responsible for checking quotations, citations, paraphrases, analysis and drafting, whether or not AI helped, with sanctions in the judge's discretion. That text is still on the court site as a comment draft. It is absent from the rules posted as current.

As at 31 October 2026.

Telling the court and the client

• Tell the courtUnclear

  Court disclosure: no rule found for South Dakota state courts. The District of South Dakota local rules posted as current do not require disclosure of AI use. The 20 October 2025 proposal also does not require disclosure; it requires the filer to check accuracy. Client disclosure/consent: no rule found.

  South Dakota Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 1.1 (SDCL chapter 16-18, Appendix)

  Public Notice of Proposed Rule Changes

  Civil Local Rules (final, approved), with Eighth Circuit Judicial Council order of 24 February 2025, and the civil and criminal rules indexes

  Ethics Opinions
• Tell the clientNo

  Same basis and sources as above.