AN ACT to amend and reenact section 12.1-31-15 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to wearing a mask in a public place.
HB 1226 amends North Dakota’s existing prohibition on wearing masks during the commission of a criminal offense. The bill keeps the current bans on wearing a mask, hood, or similar face covering to intimidate, threaten, abuse, or harass another person; to evade identification while committing a crime; or to conceal identity while fleeing after being charged, arrested, or convicted. It adds a new prohibition making it unlawful to wear a mask or other face covering with the intent to conceal one’s identity while congregating in a public place with other masked individuals.
The bill also creates an express exception for public gatherings such as Halloween celebrations, masquerades, and similar events. A violation remains a class A misdemeanor. In practical terms, the measure expands the statute beyond crime-related concealment to cover certain group masking in public spaces, while preserving ordinary costume and celebratory uses.
HB 1226 broadens Section 12.1-31-15 of the North Dakota Century Code by adding a new offense tied to concealing identity while gathering in public with others wearing masks. It affects individuals who wear masks, hoods, or similar coverings in public when the intent is identity concealment in a group setting, while leaving intact the statute’s existing criminal-intent and flight-related provisions and its Halloween/masquerade exception. The bill maintains the class A misdemeanor penalty for violations.
The voting record suggests the bill had generally favorable support, passing the House 57-32 and the Senate 42-4. That margin indicates broad approval in both chambers, though not unanimous support. No committee transcripts were provided, so the available record shows legislative backing but does not include detailed debate or public testimony.
The likely point of contention is the new restriction on wearing masks in public while congregating with others, which may be viewed by supporters as a public-safety and accountability measure and by opponents as an overbroad limitation on anonymity, expression, or lawful protest. The bill’s narrow exception for Halloween, masquerades, and similar celebrations suggests lawmakers were trying to avoid affecting ordinary costume use, but the phrase “public place” and the intent-based standard could still raise concerns about enforcement and interpretation. The split votes, especially the larger number of House nays, indicate some disagreement over the scope of the new prohibition.