It started with a 911 call on a Saturday in September of 2020.
The House of Representatives narrowly passed two articles of impeachment in the spring of 2022 by just one vote.
It’s been a year since South Dakota Senators voted to remove first-term Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg from office.
What happened in between those moments in the nearly two-year impeachment saga is the subject of eleven essays assembled in the current issue of the South Dakota Law Review.
Neil Fulton—dean of the USD Knudson School of Law, which assembles the publication—said the issue documents perspectives from 'yes' to impeach, to 'no' to remove from office and the entire process in between.
“This is going to be a permanent chapter in South Dakota history that people will wrestle with and try and understand and explore both looking forward for its precedential value, but also looking back retrospectively at this particular instance," Fulton said.
Fulton said the essays deal with many issues that came up during the impeachment process, including how to conduct an impeachment inquiry, to the political question being asked and the burden of proof needed to remove a public official from office.
“I’m glad that the law review could be at the vanguard of documenting that—providing a historical record to do that," Fulton said. "It’s going to be a conversation that carries on for scholars of South Dakota history for a while.”
Ravnsborg is barred from holding public office in South Dakota.
Lead impeachment prosecutor and then Pennington County State’s Attorney Mark Vargo replaced Ravnsborg. In November, voters elected former Attorney General Marty Jackley to helm the position of the state’s top law enforcement officer.
Click here to access essays contained in the impeachment issue of South Dakota Law Review.
