PIERRE — The South Dakota House has passed legislation banning commercial surrogacy in the state.

Lawmakers passed House Bill 1096 in a 46-20 vote on Thursday to study surrogacy in South Dakota and ban commercial surrogacy. The bill will now go to the Senate for consideration.

The bill would make facilitating a commercial surrogacy a Class 1 misdemeanor. The maximum penalty is one year in a county jail and/or a $2,000 fine.

Bill sponsor Rep. Jon Hansen, R-Dell Rapids, argued on Thursday that the Legislature hasn't given the courts authorization to enter surrogacy contracts and therefore, the contracts are currently illegal.

More:House delays vote on banning commercial surrogacy in South Dakota

The House delayed its vote on the legislation on Tuesday after Rep. Tim Rounds, R-Pierre, proposed an amendment to study surrogacy instead of banning it. The House began its discussion on Thursday by tabling Rounds' amendment and then passing an amendment to include both a study and a ban. An amendment to push the ban's start to 2021 failed.

Rounds said the bill is "still bad" and questioned why legislators would pass it when they have a lot of questions about what they're banning because of its unclear language. Surrogacy has been going on for years and the state hasn't brought legislation about it before so they can wait a year to study the issue and then pass a law, he said.

Rep. Drew Dennert, R-Aberdeen, proposed the amendment to study the issue in addition to banning it because lawmakers have heard emotional stories from families who used a surrogate and stories of bad experiences from surrogate mothers.

Most of the House's discussion on Thursday involved legislators asking Hansen questions about what would happen in specific situations under his bill, including couples asking a next door neighbor to be a surrogate or if the surrogate mother has a loss of income due to pregnancy complications. They also questioned if the bill's language precludes the potential parents from paying a surrogate mother's medical bills.

Rep. Caleb Finck, R-Tripp, questioned if the bill would mean a pastor would be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor if the pastor helps parents find a surrogate. Hansen replied yes, if the person acts like a broker for the pregnancy.

Rounds said he was concerned an altruistic surrogacy could occur without a contract and the surrogate mother could do whatever she wants without the input of the parents. He was concerned about the welfare of the child in that situation.

More:House panel supports banning commercial surrogacy in South Dakota

Rep. Erin Healy, D-Sioux Falls, said the sole surrogacy agency in South Dakota does a "really good job" at evaluating both surrogates and potential parents, including a background check, psychological evaluation and financial assessment.

"That's what protects women and families in South Dakota," she said.

Healy called for the Legislature to regulate surrogacy instead of ban it. She pointed out that plasma, sperm and egg donations are regulated. Banning surrogacy instead of regulating it is "criminalizing women," she said.

Rep. Taffy Howard, R-Rapid City, took issue with Healy's comment. Surrogacy puts a price on a pregnancy, which exploits women who need money, she said.

"This is about stopping the exploitation of women," Howard said.

A couple of lawmakers recounted their own family's struggles with fertility.

Rep. Shawn Bordeaux, D-Mission, said he looked up at a family sitting in the gallery watching the debate and he saw their sadness and struggles with fertility. He and his late wife struggled to become pregnant and they had a miscarriage. He said he realized how much women struggle as he watched it happen firsthand.

The U.S. Constitution guarantees "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" and Bordeaux questioned what right legislators have to tell people they don't have the right to pursue the happiness of having a child.

"We have a lot of problems in this state and we spend a lot of time on things we have no business in," he said.