The First Amendment to the United States Constitution makes it unlawful for the U.S. Congress or any of the states to prohibit the free exercise of religion.

The free exercise of religion means the right to believe and profess whatever religious doctrine one desires. Thus, the First Amendment obviously excludes all governmental regulation of religious beliefs. The government may not compel affirmation of religious belief, punish the expression of religious doctrines it believes to be false, impose special disabilities on the basis of religious views or religious status, or lend its power to one or the other side in controversies over religious authority or dogma.

But the exercise of religion often involves not only belief and profession of belief, but the performance of (or abstention from) physical acts: assembling with others for a worship service; participating in sacramental use of bread and wine; proselytizing; or abstaining from certain foods or certain modes of transportation.

A State would presumably be prohibiting the free exercise of religion if it sought to ban such acts or abstentions only when they are engaged in for religious reasons, or only because of the religious belief that they display. It would be unconstitutional, for example, to ban the creation of statues that are to be used for worship purposes, or to prohibit bowing down before a golden calf.

In South Dakota, as in all states, the First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides robust protections for the free exercise of religion. This means that individuals in South Dakota have the right to hold any religious belief they choose and to express those beliefs without fear of government interference. The state cannot compel individuals to affirm any religious belief, punish them for their religious expressions, or impose special disabilities based on their religious views or status. Furthermore, the free exercise of religion extends beyond mere belief to the performance of, or abstention from, physical acts that are religious in nature, such as worship services, sacramental rituals, proselytizing, and following religious dietary laws. South Dakota cannot prohibit these acts when they are performed for religious reasons or because they display a religious belief. Any state action that targets religious practices in such a manner would likely be found unconstitutional. It's important to note that while the free exercise of religion is deeply protected, it is not absolute; restrictions may be imposed if they are neutral, generally applicable, and not specifically targeting religious practices, and if the state has a compelling interest that is achieved by the least restrictive means.