[{"_1":2,"_88":-5,"_89":-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],{"_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",6097929,"mediaKeyId","2826227-2c3f738d41cb9667c21b767ef2c9db13","parentId",2826227,"title","Judiciary chair warns sentencing bill could 'abandon hope'; seeks parole-board study and flags prison capacity and fiscal impacts","audioSeconds",803,"startMs",1821000,"endMs",2624000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2826227-2c3f738d41cb9667c21b767ef2c9db13&start=1821&end=2624","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2826227-2c3f738d41cb9667c21b767ef2c9db13/thumbnail_1821000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6097929/North-Dakota/Judiciary-chair-warns-sentencing-bill-could-abandon-hope-seeks-parole-board-study-and-flags-prison-capacity-and-fiscal-impacts","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6097929-ccaa62c093d9c806aaea6093b22d92c4/orig.mp4?Expires=1770931375&Signature=M5KP4T3~sPuNYJSMMCtaQaUqWM6B-CgUcDgPVo7jalRweulnn~RQNLcFJNXTVIAov~pe2QHDefPyZksT8dgtj3A8FyzbfAmvCHXo6V9AWf8Y1ZuoCFbNxGTYWQ3KJ9aBO1VRg0mP8Ll58rchutUO52A9om-HL7FQ8DEsrIHMpGZKcn5tntVViM8AcFx9KnfJmFoohgYL9jp3QLf5Gjpt-mD8fIrl0K~gwTz4sdEwKNytMABdg3THJZzYB1KH1ikQkxi2aSNKrxxt0XdWm7gxYbeDvGnJdBHozzl-7W~TYHSHQGUbaCJ5c9cp8~e0-UBc~udGgtKZm5-qJBr2DjbVTQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","North Dakota Legislature","date","2025-03-31T00:00:00Z","article","Chairman Clamine told the House Judiciary Committee that he fears Senate Bill 2128's sentencing changes would remove incentives for rehabilitation, and he asked legislative counsel to prepare further amendments and a study of the Parole Board and parole process before the committee acts.

\"This bill ... kinda reminds me of that. It's almost like we have to put that sign on the gate of the state pen,\" Clamine said, quoting the Dante line \"Abandon all hope, ye who enter here,\" to capture his view that the measure could reduce prisoners' hope for eventual release. The bill would establish a 50% requirement for some offenders to serve half their sentence unless they qualify as an \"eligible offender\" under a list of cross-referenced offenses; the committee discussed how that interacts with an existing 85% rule for violent offenders.

Clamine said the committee has received differing statistics from the Attorney General's office and the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation and said the panel is in a position to resolve those conflicts. He circulated proposed amendments from multiple sources — including legislative counsel, the Attorney General's office and an outside conservative group (CPAC) — and asked members to review them before the committee reconvenes after the floor session.

Fiscal and capacity concerns dominated the discussion. Clamine told members the fiscal note attached to SB 2128 totals roughly $22.5 million per biennium (about $45 million over two biennia) and questioned where the state would house people if sentences lengthen. \"Our state prison is full,\" he said. He noted county jails are at capacity and recalled prior requests for roughly $250 million for county jail construction or improvement that were not funded. Clamine also referenced a prior $80 million prison expansion.

Outside proposals and specifics discussed:
- CPAC offered an amendment addressing absconding from transitional centers that would require tracking devices and includes a $600,000 appropriation to pay for monitoring equipment.
- Multiple proposed amendment packets from the Attorney General and others are under consideration; Clamine said one congressman’s (Representative Johnston's) suggestions were merged into the draft he distributed.

Committee members pressed for more information. Representative Overson asked whether increases in violent crime were driven by people who moved into the state or by in‑state residents; Clamine said that a broader study in the budget for the Department of Corrections could examine such trends. Representative Wade asked whether offenders are being released early in apparent conflict with the 85% rule and whether the Parole Board is responsible for early releases.

Clamine noted that parole decisions rest with the Parole Board, not the Department of Corrections, and said the committee needs a study of the parole process in addition to the Department of Corrections study now in the budget. \"It's not the Department of Corrections that's letting people out. It's the Parole Board that does it,\" Clamine said, noting the Parole Board has six members though \"only three of them work at a time.\" He said he will ask legislative counsel to prepare a study and that the committee will consider adding it as an amendment to SB 2128 or the appropriations bill.

The committee agreed to recess for the floor session and to return to consider proposed amendments and the requested study. Clamine said the committee's deadline to act with a fiscal note is Wednesday.

Ending: Committee members will review printed amendments and the legislative-counsel study request; no vote was taken on SB 2128 during the session.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Judiciary Mar 31, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Chairman Clamine raised constitutional and policy concerns about Senate Bill 2128’s proposed 50% rule for offenders, compared it to 'abandon all hope' language, and asked for legislative-counsel work and a study of the Parole Board amid worries about an estimated $22.5 million biennial fiscal note and limited prison capacity.","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},6097933,"House Judiciary subcommittee rewrites custody-enforcement bill to restore parenting time, tie penalties to contempt and create task force",471,1226000,1697000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2826227-2c3f738d41cb9667c21b767ef2c9db13&start=1226&end=1697","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2826227-2c3f738d41cb9667c21b767ef2c9db13/thumbnail_1226000.jpg","/articles/6097933/North-Dakota/House-Judiciary-subcommittee-rewrites-custody-enforcement-bill-to-restore-parenting-time-tie-penalties-to-contempt-and-create-task-force","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6097933-18e00f3b1c3a021fc96c1824fc0ad010/orig.mp4?Expires=1770931375&Signature=am8Z7QcI3C9Okv1aMbSRmJodlHtGIOYr9-B9DZzZ5ZL91qDRCIo5cut8xBJLqsNgTcNL211sVhHqybE~Fn59ZzULFGwaA1Ppl6sF-QO26iq6kpLRmjd2GRI1TgXeuGDSXGq39jHZPM47Jx9Vq9pLKfKJbGaKPeWBafiZ651WFjL7zKOf2rzFdeugAi4eQ3G9L6KImAHFWSIM6z3-d221QlkgRPTQrUdroUvssabenem2xK21YWfUE-VRk39TL83h-nh7g6DaSKtO435MdNKwyOqyCGW1hVE5zVX4WagP99rU8LM58mTJ~yFZ-IQ~eCl1STdjUjWjNqcM-yYR5mrGvQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The House Judiciary Committee on Monday reviewed a subcommittee amendment to Senate Bill 2186 that would change how courts respond when a parent denies another parent scheduled parenting time, proposing a remedy that awards the wronged parent up to double the time lost, ties criminal penalties to contempt of court and creates a task force to study implementation.

The amendment, presented by subcommittee chair Representative Vetter, removes portions of the prior draft that had placed some enforcement responsibility on law enforcement and instead focuses on restoring parenting time, a higher evidentiary standard and judicial remedies. \"What this bill would do is if you take time away from one party ... the other party would then get up to double time back,\" Vetter told the committee. He said legislative counsel had inserted language requiring \"clear and convincing\" evidence for additional parenting time.

The change matters because law enforcement and some witnesses told the panel that custody orders are often not detailed or readily available to officers and that criminalizing routine pickup disputes could carry disproportionate consequences, including job loss. Vetter said witnesses at the subcommittee included people with differing perspectives; one told the subcommittee that an infraction could jeopardize a firefighting job.

Key provisions in the proposed amendment:
- Double-time remedy: If a parent is denied scheduled parenting time, a court could order additional parenting time for the aggrieved parent, up to double the amount of time taken, and the additional time must be comparable in type and duration (for example, holiday time for holiday time).
- Evidentiary standard: The amendment uses a \"clear and convincing\" evidence standard before awarding additional parenting time.
- Contempt of court link: Criminal penalties for noncompliance would be enforced through contempt proceedings at the judge's discretion; the amendment leaves the range of contempt sanctions to judicial authority.
- Parenting apps: The amendment recommends that judges may consider ordering parents to use a co‑parenting application to document schedules and communications, but it is presented as an optional tool rather than a mandated requirement.
- Task force: The amendment establishes a task force of professionals to study implementation, alternatives and further statutory changes.

Representative Olson questioned whether language in the draft might be confined to situations involving an \"allegation of harm to the child,\" noting that certain sections read as if they applied only where harm allegations were involved. Vetter and Chairman Clamine agreed to have legislative counsel review phrasing and section placement; Clamine suggested legislative counsel determine whether the language belongs in the same section or should be a separate section.

The committee paused before a formal motion. After questions about a missing reference to contempt of court, the panel agreed to defer action until legislative counsel confirms cross references and final wording. \"I don't think we want to make a motion to approve the amendment yet until you clear that out,\" Clamine said.

Next steps: Committee members said they will await corrected language from legislative counsel and may add or remove items before a formal vote. The subcommittee chair said the amendment reflects the subcommittee's intention to give courts a noncriminal remedy to restore parenting time and to provide a structured review of broader changes through the proposed task force.

Ending: The committee took no final vote on the amendment; members will reconvene after the floor session to consider revised language and any additional committee changes.","A subcommittee amendment to Senate Bill 2186 would award lost parenting time as a \"double time\" remedy, tie criminal penalties to contempt of court, encourage judges to consider co‑parenting apps and create a task force; the committee deferred action pending clarification from legislative counsel.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Judiciary chair warns sentencing bill could 'abandon hope'; seeks parole-board study and flags prison capacity and fiscal impacts

House Judiciary subcommittee rewrites custody-enforcement bill to restore parenting time, tie penalties to contempt and create task force