A BILL for an Act to create and enact a new section to chapter 54-06 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to the prohibition of a policy, order, or ordinance that limits free speech.
Summary
HB 1273 would add a new section to chapter 54-06 of the North Dakota Century Code prohibiting the state and political subdivisions from adopting or enforcing any policy, order, or ordinance that limits or prohibits an individual’s speech. The bill expressly states that this prohibition includes hate crime ordinances, and it also bars cities and counties from using home rule authority to override the restriction. Any local policy that conflicts with the new section would be void.
In practical terms, the bill would significantly limit the ability of local governments in North Dakota to regulate speech through ordinances or administrative orders. It would create a broad state-level preemption of local speech restrictions and would affect municipalities, counties, and other political subdivisions that might otherwise adopt hate-crime-related or speech-limiting measures.
Impact
The bill would amend state law by creating a new statutory prohibition in chapter 54-06 that invalidates any state or local policy, order, or ordinance limiting speech, including hate crime ordinances. It would also override contrary home rule charters or local ordinances, reducing local government authority and making conflicting local measures unenforceable as a matter of state law.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have faced strong opposition in the House, where it failed on second reading by a vote of 20 yeas to 73 nays on February 6, 2025. The vote suggests limited support for the proposal in the chamber, and the absence of committee transcript discussion indicates no recorded committee debate was provided in the materials. Overall, the legislative outcome reflects a negative sentiment toward the bill.
Contention
The main point of contention is the bill’s broad reach: supporters likely viewed it as a free-speech protection measure, while opponents likely objected to its effect on local control and its explicit inclusion of hate crime ordinances. The language preventing cities and counties from using home rule authority is also a likely source of concern, because it would preempt local policymaking and could invalidate existing or future local speech-related regulations.