AN ACT to amend and reenact sections 12.1-17-07 and 12.1-17-07.1 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to harassment and stalking with a robot; and to provide a penalty.
HB 1429 updates North Dakota’s harassment and stalking statutes to expressly cover conduct carried out through a “robot,” defined broadly to include artificial systems that sense, process, and act using technology, including artificial intelligence and remotely piloted aircraft. In the harassment section, the bill adds a new offense for using a robot to engage in offensive conduct with no legitimate purpose, alongside existing prohibitions on threats, anonymous or abusive calls, repeated communications, and false statements causing mental anguish. It also retains and clarifies provisions covering false 911 calls and harassment of emergency response systems, including liability for the costs of unnecessary emergency responses.
In the stalking statute, the bill expands the definition of “course of conduct” to include acts conducted with a robot under a person’s direct control and broadens stalking to include unauthorized tracking of a person’s movements or location through GPS, a robot, or other electronic means. The bill preserves existing defenses for law enforcement and licensed private investigators acting within the scope of employment and maintains the rule that constitutionally protected activity is excluded from prosecution. It also keeps the existing felony/misdemeanor structure, with repeat offenders, violations of protective orders, or stalking-related prior convictions subject to a class C felony, and other violations treated as a class A misdemeanor.
The bill amends sections 12.1-17-07 and 12.1-17-07.1 of the North Dakota Century Code, expanding the state’s harassment and stalking laws to address modern technology, including AI-enabled devices and drones. It creates explicit statutory coverage for robot-based harassment and robot-assisted stalking, and it broadens electronic tracking language to capture GPS and other electronic surveillance methods. The measure does not create a new standalone chapter; instead, it updates existing criminal provisions and preserves the current misdemeanor and felony penalty framework, while also reinforcing liability for false emergency calls and unnecessary emergency response costs.
The bill appears to have been broadly supported and noncontroversial in the Legislature. It passed the House 91-0 with 3 absent and the Senate 45-0 with 2 absent, indicating unanimous support among voting members. The lack of recorded committee transcripts or dissent suggests the measure was viewed as a practical update to existing criminal law rather than a politically divisive proposal.
No formal opposition is reflected in the available record, but the main policy issue implicit in the bill is how far the harassment and stalking statutes should reach when technology is involved. Potential points of concern include the breadth of the new “robot” definition, which includes artificial intelligence and remotely piloted aircraft, and whether the expanded language could overlap with lawful conduct such as journalism, advocacy, surveillance by authorized professionals, or other constitutionally protected activity. The bill addresses some of those concerns by preserving defenses for peace officers and licensed private investigators and by excluding constitutionally protected activity, but the record does not show any active dispute over those provisions.