[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6376089,"mediaKeyId","2140562-f5ea72e87b7acc773e8d543f650f721e","parentId",2140562,"title","Committee holds House Bill 1290 pending fiscal note at attorney general's request","audioSeconds",118,"startMs",252000,"endMs",370000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2140562-f5ea72e87b7acc773e8d543f650f721e&start=252&end=370","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2140562-f5ea72e87b7acc773e8d543f650f721e/thumbnail_252000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6376089/North-Dakota/Committee-holds-House-Bill-1290-pending-fiscal-note-at-attorney-generals-request","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6376089-853ff031e3f7765bf94a35da0af4ab87/orig.mp4?Expires=1771166583&Signature=FvYEOMBW58AmHAqp-ulDwwwsdQInkDN8uk2AGXnbapta2oQOXQJk1zhXxrY651u1j8dzlNXgC-rn~wHcAeaZ3U25T-ZBfwCpMeWmeNVCb1RnatJrdmGtjZ~2ncCIfmXhYGFtkc2In59nzh0JzH4bjHbIdcuwFzD-u28yFUSC-VV2s6PAIG0uTis6Ikp7snJAEcJR0-VAP~sDz5l1Nrg4fKPzo~NzApEkx~wAEQ-KA0i7GpIW7B1vc0NpnUsbK17rKTkDbo7MjreleRyeN2ensbski2BKPgueh-tQncyW4cnOynTDM-uiNKzFJuPJpxFSc~nDxL0lcnDGPcRIMc7uFQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","House Judiciary, ND","date","2025-01-22T00:00:00Z","article","House Bill 1290 was held at the start of the session after the committee disclosed that the attorney general’s office requested a fiscal note. Chairman Clamine said the committee received an email from Legislative Counsel noting that if a fiscal note is prepared it could affect prior action and that the committee should hold the bill until the fiscal note is completed.

A committee member corrected a numerical error referenced in testimony about software costs, saying testimony had misstated an amount as billions when the correct figure was millions; the speaker noted uncertainty about the purpose of the fiscal note. The committee did not take further action on HB 1290 at the meeting and recorded that it would “hold that bill” pending the fiscal-note process and revisit if the fiscal note changes the previous vote.

No motion to advance the bill was recorded; the action is a hold pending supplemental analysis from Legislative Counsel and the attorney general’s office.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Judiciary II Jan 22, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Committee members agreed to hold House Bill 1290 after the attorney general’s office requested a fiscal note; the chair said the bill will be held until counsel produces the fiscal note and the committee will revisit if the note affects the prior do-not-pass vote.","taxTitle","Judiciary, House of Representatives, Legislative, North Dakota","taxId",28895,"location","North Dakota","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6376094,"Committee amends bill to require Ten Commandments displays in school cafeterias; chair to seek fiscal note",1085,3006000,4091000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2140562-f5ea72e87b7acc773e8d543f650f721e&start=3006&end=4091","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2140562-f5ea72e87b7acc773e8d543f650f721e/thumbnail_3006000.jpg","/articles/6376094/North-Dakota/Committee-amends-bill-to-require-Ten-Commandments-displays-in-school-cafeterias-chair-to-seek-fiscal-note","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6376094-fbcb19110a5c8d320d9d00206a14e20c/orig.mp4?Expires=1771166583&Signature=aEaRAgSoWvD69y5GBk02Ee4V0PjVb~lXJ1RRU4YQK4eRhSeDAufOjxSsfC2BFr0CT8T8rYMN426FcgKPICXktHRtOxo2DGvvQrcBN~upS7JXHJyG~Y4OsrXpfpeYdbGHabPN7w~LBR6X08xDpQN9ZjlX1hKsYPPLylZVWZZhyG0OoUkdCr95g6iDrcvqIvhelW7Mf4KjYf2fNmdhf~9Rp6HHhLHtb8Ty1IHOulPbF4XOJ2YeMlmGLAlZPZo90SKDQBB~iG-n9yK11aBVrNkld-ZYDWEp6u7R7gSrVCy8ZqhhfgqFB3lpW9FJtyVonPrSvD4KpmQHzWiNSGrh~uGiog__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The House Judiciary Committee approved an amendment to House Bill 1145 that would require Ten Commandments displays in certain school locations and allow districts and colleges to accept donated displays or donated funds to pay for them. The amendment to the bill carried on roll call, 11 to 3.

Representative Hoverson, who presented the amendment, said he and local educators preferred a single school-level display rather than one in every classroom and recommended cafeterias or other “prominent and visible locations.” The amendment removes language that would have allowed schools to spend their own funds and instead conditions the displays on donated funds or donated displays when possible, the sponsor said.

Representative Schneider questioned whether existing permissive law (cited in committee as section 15.10933) already allows school boards to authorize Ten Commandments displays and pointed to immunity provisions (cited as 15.10933.5) that protect school boards and employees when they permit or display the Ten Commandments. Schneider warned that making the displays mandatory could raise constitutional problems and said such changes may invite litigation.

Committee members debated the practical cost of replacing or installing displays and the likelihood of litigation. Chairman Clamine said he will confer with Legislative Counsel to determine whether a fiscal note is required, noting potential costs to the Attorney General’s office to defend any litigation. Representative Hoverson said the amendment’s intent was to condition any display requirement on donations, but the bill’s text as amended did not explicitly say that; members asked Legislative Counsel to review the fiscal and legal implications.

The committee approved the amendment on roll call (11 yes, 3 no). The chair directed staff to consult Legislative Counsel about whether a fiscal note is required and said the committee will revisit the bill once that review is complete.","The committee approved an amendment to House Bill 1145 requiring Ten Commandments displays in prominent locations (sponsor proposed cafeterias) and directing schools to fund displays with donated funds; members debated constitutionality and a fiscal note request was flagged.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6376099,"House Judiciary Committee advances bill expanding penalties for possession of computer-generated sexual images of minors",2591,407000,2998000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2140562-f5ea72e87b7acc773e8d543f650f721e&start=407&end=2998","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2140562-f5ea72e87b7acc773e8d543f650f721e/thumbnail_407000.jpg","/articles/6376099/North-Dakota/House-Judiciary-Committee-advances-bill-expanding-penalties-for-possession-of-computer-generated-sexual-images-of-minors","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6376099-f506c52afe6ca794aafe37308ac83858/orig.mp4?Expires=1771166583&Signature=PungOd7IGunG1sZ2~hGuYPLlf3sVTR8lIUPKltwagaXrzQQc3DfjVz0NnBnsLBAgvojjnhk1yrPnarde2ACwNttxIKe1Bq-qHZbap3JLvTYECrN2vzPetWSKsQLK87bk~Q75ugYpsxllAkGsQRLY7HNIsDrrvheq~uRjj4WuCto7b-xLRnWhh2KXO5ftfYlf8uAaohs8G8uGXqj7fP-0t6LtEG4DS0LCCkabMna2cN-RoR6TvbWSjgasTG-KM89SOBfYEDn6AGMG2ORnSFNFwul8tJna1PFKLsCF520VfNDVPpf4m4eHuZMWMUWq3w3iwCdTPqMnhBkdTDkGltDmRw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The House Judiciary Committee on an amended vote advanced House Bill 1386, which would expand criminal penalties for possession of certain computer-generated sexual images involving minors, voting 9 to 5 to give the bill a do pass as amended.

The bill, as amended by Representative Carls, revises language that previously used the term “prepubescent minor” to specify a “minor under 12 years of age” and replaces “infant or toddler” with “minor under 3 years of age.” Representative Carls said the changes were intended to reduce vagueness in the bill’s age categories and to limit potential liability for internet service providers by clarifying that providers who only provide the platform should not be automatically liable.

Supporters, including Representative Carls and Representative McCloud, said the amendments target materials that depict sexual conduct involving young children, whether in photographs or in some cases computer-generated images.

Opponents and questioners raised two recurring concerns: whether age-based, enhanced penalties can lawfully apply to purely AI-generated images (because an AI image may not depict a real child), and whether placing the computer-generated-image language in the statute chapter addressing sexual performances by children is the right location. Representative Twite asked why the cutoff for a heightened penalty was 12 rather than 18 and noted the bill already treats possession generally as a class C felony. Representative Wolfe and others said that AI-generated imagery complicates the statute because “you can’t say that’s a child under 12” when the image is not of an actual person, and urged careful drafting so penalties apply as intended.

Committee members discussed federal law and industry practice regarding service-provider monitoring. Representative Schneider said she was “really uncomfortable” giving blanket liability to providers without further research; Representative Carls said the amendment was intended to avoid imposing broad platform liability.

Anna Frizzell, cited by committee members as an expert witness who had testified to the committee, was referenced as supporting the bill’s penalties; committee discussion noted she had “appreciated the penalty that is in this” (as reported to the committee).

The committee first approved Representative Carls’s amendment by roll call earlier in the hearing (motion carried 13 to 0, 1 absent). Later, after extended discussion and a motion to reconsider, the committee voted to give HB 1386 a do pass as amended; the final roll-call vote on the do-pass motion was 9 yes, 5 no.

The committee also discussed related bills (including references to HB 1351 and HB 1320) and whether provisions addressing deepfake or computer-generated obscene material more broadly should be included in a different chapter of law dealing with obscenity. Several members said they plan to consider overlap with the obscenity chapter when they take up HB 1351 later in the session.

The bill now moves forward as amended; the committee named a bill carrier to carry HB 1386 to the next stage.

The meeting record shows multiple requests for more precise drafting on how age-based enhancements apply to purely computer-generated imagery and a desire by some members for additional analysis before final floor consideration.","The House Judiciary Committee voted 9-5 to give House Bill 1386 a “do pass as amended,” adding age-based enhanced penalties and clarifying internet-service-provider liability. Lawmakers debated whether age-based enhancements can apply to AI-generated images and whether the penalties are properly placed in the statute.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee holds House Bill 1290 pending fiscal note at attorney general's request

Committee amends bill to require Ten Commandments displays in school cafeterias; chair to seek fiscal note

House Judiciary Committee advances bill expanding penalties for possession of computer-generated sexual images of minors