The Governor has signed SB 160 and it will become effective July 1, 2001. SD S.B. 160 VERSION: Engrossed VERSION-DATE: February 28, 2001 SYNOPSIS: FOR AN ACT ENTITLED, An Act to prohibit the offering of postsecondary education credit or degree by nonaccredited institutions. TEXT: BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA: Section 1. That chapter 13-49 be amended by adding thereto a NEW SECTION to read as follows: No person or governmental entity may offer postsecondary education credit or degree in South Dakota, or while organized under the laws of South Dakota, unless currently holding accreditation from a regional accrediting agency recognized by the United States Department of Education pursuant to 20 U.S.C. Section 1099b as amended to January 1, 2001, or participating in any federal financial assistance program authorized by Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 as amended to January 1, 2001. A violation of this section is a Class 1 misdemeanor and subjects the violator to a civil penalty of twenty-five thousand dollars. The provisions of this section do not apply to a religious institution that offers credit or degree solely for the purpose of conferring status or authority within that religion.
We may see the cost of good intentions on this one. As stated in members' previous posts on this topic, the bill as written does not even permit the creation of new schools that fully intend to seek accreditation. Though my legal expertise is not in education law, I predict court challenges, perhaps on constitutional grounds (freedom to contract) or antitrust grounds (restraint of trade), because the bill way oversteps what is necessary to prevent diploma mills from operating within the state.
Hi David, If you have some US legal expertise, perhaps you can explain why "restraint of trade" isn't used to defend eg. the right of a DETC qualification holder to be considered equally for a faculty position at an RA university alongside someone holding an RA qualification ? This has puzzled me for some time .... especially when both are recognised by the US DoEd and both are members of CHEA. Cheers, Neil
Neil, because I'm not an antitrust lawyer, I won't speculate in detail about the scenario you described, other than to say that setting minimum floor credentials re degrees and qualifications is not "restraint of trade" in the context to which I refer.
