AN ACT to create and enact a new subsection to section 27-05-06 and chapter 40-18.1 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to jurisdiction of district courts and municipal court requirements, jurisdiction, procedures, and processes; to amend and reenact subsection 1 of section 29-07-01.1 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to indigent defense; and to repeal sections 40-11-10, 40-11-11, 40-11-12, and 40-11-13 and chapter 40-18 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to ordinance violations and municipal judges.
HB 1032 substantially reorganizes North Dakota law governing municipal courts and ordinance enforcement. It creates a new chapter 40-18.1 to replace the repealed municipal court provisions in chapter 40-18, and it also adds a new district court jurisdiction provision for certain city ordinance cases in small cities without a municipal court or in cities that have agreements to transfer cases. The bill sets out how municipal courts are established, how judges and clerks are selected and compensated, what facilities and staffing cities must provide, and how municipal courts may operate jointly across multiple cities.
The bill also standardizes municipal court procedure and appellate review. It defines municipal court jurisdiction, limits municipal court authority over certain repeat DUI-related offenses, domestic violence offenses, juvenile criminal matters, and cases involving unlicensed judges, and provides procedures for fitness-to-proceed and criminal responsibility issues. It establishes rules for venue, summonses, costs and fees, contempt, collection of fines and judgments, transfers to district court, appeals from municipal courts before and after July 1, 2026, and the process for abolishing municipal courts in smaller and larger cities under specified conditions. Beginning July 1, 2026, municipal courts become courts of record, changing the nature of appeals and the record used on review.
HB 1032 repeals the prior municipal court statutes in chapter 40-18 and replaces them with a new framework in chapter 40-18.1, while also amending indigent defense law to assign defense costs to cities in municipal ordinance cases and related appeals or transfers. It expands district court jurisdiction over ordinance violations in certain circumstances, especially for small cities without municipal courts or where cases are transferred, and it creates detailed funding, filing-fee, and reimbursement rules for those proceedings. The bill affects cities, municipal judges, district courts, prosecutors, indigent defendants, and the state court system by shifting responsibilities for court administration, records, appeals, and some case costs.
The bill appears to have been broadly supported and noncontroversial in the legislative process. It passed the House twice with overwhelming support and no opposition, and the Senate with only one dissenting vote. The vote pattern suggests general agreement on the need to modernize and consolidate municipal court law, clarify procedures, and address the transition to courts of record.
No committee testimony was provided, and the vote history shows little visible opposition, so there is no clear record of major controversy in the available materials. The most likely areas of policy sensitivity are the shift of indigent defense and related costs to cities, the new court-of-record requirements beginning in 2026, the limits on municipal court jurisdiction over repeat DUI, domestic violence, and juvenile matters, and the conditions under which cities may abolish or transfer municipal courts to district court. These provisions primarily affect city governments, municipal judges, and defendants who may face different procedures or appeal rights depending on the court and effective date.