A contentious debate unfolded during the North Dakota State Legislature's House Floor Session on March 12, 2025, as lawmakers discussed Senate Bill 2365, which seeks to eliminate judges' ability to waive fees for the 24/7 sobriety program. The bill was introduced at the request of a county sheriff who argued that fee waivers were straining local budgets, leaving law enforcement to cover costs when judges opted to waive fees for defendants.

Opponents of the bill, including several state's attorneys, voiced strong concerns about its implications. They argued that the current system allows judges to waive fees based on financial hardship, a necessary measure to prevent individuals from being jailed simply for being unable to pay. One state's attorney emphasized that if defendants can afford to drink or use drugs, they should be able to pay for sobriety testing, highlighting the program's success in keeping individuals accountable.

Supporters of the bill, including law enforcement representatives, contended that the financial burden of waived fees falls disproportionately on sheriff's departments and local taxpayers. They argued that maintaining the program without the ability to waive fees could lead to increased crime and strain on public safety resources.

The discussion revealed a deep divide among lawmakers, with some advocating for the bill as a means to ensure accountability and others warning that it could lead to unconstitutional outcomes, effectively creating a "debtors' prison" scenario for those unable to pay. As the debate continued, the committee recommended a "do not pass" on the bill, urging legislators to reconsider the balance between financial responsibility and the need for judicial discretion in cases of genuine hardship.

The outcome of this legislative battle remains uncertain, but it underscores the ongoing struggle to manage public safety programs while addressing the financial realities faced by many individuals in the justice system.