[{"_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",6080061,"mediaKeyId","2952067-ac279be34bd3810e507ea66b936ed00a","parentId",2952067,"title","Committee hears lengthy debate on bill to relocate sexually explicit material in schools and public libraries; no vote","audioSeconds",3568,"startMs",242000,"endMs",3810000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2952067-ac279be34bd3810e507ea66b936ed00a&start=242&end=3810","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2952067-ac279be34bd3810e507ea66b936ed00a/thumbnail_242000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6080061/North-Dakota/Committee-hears-lengthy-debate-on-bill-to-relocate-sexually-explicit-material-in-schools-and-public-libraries-no-vote","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6080061-cb1039f4c31df73f7fbbde70259a1a34/orig.mp4?Expires=1770896153&Signature=FEC9ur-vUcyzgVyJ73UKWMoOq9Xvg29Bygab46cyPyvcUV-T70JW6dIqNoF-Ego03X91xXEFJJZFpyvcxRTDf86ZaMAphzHKXF2KMDhk9g4oEquMMkKGr4~dFVk0kziLbBovkvYz2rX24elvCg-0njHfDPmIXFCsy2CbluyYR53Q0TUHYWipz5JbdW9~U~~QCEFgha4Zt-v1gnHMhyXskJuIVYivN2NF4JMs0Z8DYsgX23b2oStfs~5EQyYDzsUKXHGf47WAJGUQ~KCyGzWrqBLh5xF8CAX2QZVLQEUWy2R1Z8HMLLB08yeXxT8ea-4Xic~7jFuKX4TcpQHDB-bL-Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","North Dakota State Legislature","date","2025-04-10T00:00:00Z","article","Representative Lawrence Clamine, chair of the House Judiciary Committee, presented Senate Bill 2,307 on behalf of its Senate sponsors, telling the House Appropriations Committee the measure would require school districts and public libraries to adopt policies ensuring “explicit sexual material” is not easily accessible to minors and to relocate any such materials to areas not readily reachable by children. “This bill does not ban any books nor does it require any books to be removed from the library,” Clamine said as he summarized the bill’s text, which incorporates the Miller test for obscenity.

The bill would add public school libraries to the list of places where minors are ‘‘invited as part of the general public’’ and would require each school district and public library to form a committee to reconsider relocations when asked by an individual and to refer disputes to the local state’s attorney. If a state’s attorney determines material is obscene under the Miller standard and a library or school district does not take corrective action, the state’s attorney could notify the state treasurer or the superintendent of public instruction to withhold state funds until compliance, and may prosecute for failure to comply.

Senator Keith Behm, the bill’s Senate sponsor, offered an amendment that removes a disputed Section 6 (which addressed digital-age access and had generated a fiscal note tied to ODIN, the statewide library technology network) and substitutes references to the federal Children’s Internet Protection Act, or CIPA. “All libraries that receive E‑rate funding have to follow this already,” Behm told committee members, saying the amendment was intended to remove the ODIN fiscal note attached to the original section.

Corey Quirk, deputy CIO for Court Technology Services and a witness for ODIN, told the committee the proposed amendment would eliminate ODIN’s previously estimated fiscal exposure. “The proposed amendment as presented to you this morning . . . would eliminate the need for the current fiscal note,” Quirk said, referring to software costs tied to age‑verification and electronic resource access.

State’s attorneys’ offices and other witnesses warned the committee the bill could create new workload and legal obligations. Jonathan Byers of the North Dakota State’s Attorneys Association said his members would be required not only to review material but to investigate and, in many counties, to hire outside prosecutors because ethical rules bar an office from acting as investigator, expert witness and prosecutor in the same matter. “The example is: you’re the investigator, the expert witness and the prosecutor — all for no additional money — and that is what these state’s attorneys are going to have to do,” Byers said, and he described a resulting fiscal impact for county prosecutors.

Committee members pressed several other practical questions. Representatives asked whether moving material to a higher shelf or a locked cabinet would count as “not easily accessible” in small, volunteer‑run libraries; whether the penalty of withholding state funds from an entire school district would be legally and practically workable; and whether ODIN, which provides statewide electronic access through apps such as Libby or Hoopla, would still allow remote access to materials in a way the bill would not constrain if the Section 6 digital measures were removed.

Representative Murphy and others raised concerns about relying on a local state’s attorney as the final arbiter of the Miller test, asking how consistent application would be across counties. Clamine said the bill changes one word of the Miller language — replacing “ordinary” with “reasonable” — to create what he described as an “objective” standard, and said a state’s attorney would consult case law when asked to render an opinion.

Members discussed a packet of challenged‑book lists from the American Library Association as evidence of the types of titles that have generated complaints nationally and in North Dakota, but several committee members and witnesses noted those lists track challenges, not judicial findings of obscenity. Some members who recounted local incidents said anecdotal failures of local processes motivated the bill. Others, including representatives from larger library systems, warned of implementation burdens for small, volunteer libraries and the risk of inconsistent enforcement.

After more than two hours of questions and testimony — including a detailed explanation of the ODIN fiscal note and the states’ attorneys’ concerns — the committee did not act. Committee leaders said Senator Behm’s amendment would be entered into the record and the fiscal presentation was on file; the bill will return to the committee at a later date for additional consideration.

Why it matters: The bill would change how local libraries and school districts handle material challenged as sexually explicit and would add a formal legal review and potential financial penalties for noncompliance. Opponents warn that relying on local prosecutors and withholding broad state funding raises legal and financial questions, while supporters say the bill is narrowly tailored to protect minors rather than to ban books.

What’s next: The committee explicitly did not take a vote and left the bill pending; Senator Behm’s amendment and the fiscal analysis by ODIN are part of the committee record for future hearings.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Appropriations Thursday, Apr 10, 2025 8:26 AM - 11:39 AM","oneSentenceSummary","Representative Lawrence Clamine told the House Appropriations Committee Senate Bill 2,307 would require public school districts and public libraries to adopt policies ensuring material the bill defines as explicit is relocated to areas not easily accessible to minors; the committee heard lengthy testimony on enforcement, digital access and fiscal impact and did not vote on the bill.","taxTitle","Appropriations, House of Representatives, Legislative, North Dakota","taxId",28310,"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},6080055,"Appropriations committee advances three budgets after votes on amendments to ethics commission funding and processes",2615,5505000,8120000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2952067-ac279be34bd3810e507ea66b936ed00a&start=5505&end=8120","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2952067-ac279be34bd3810e507ea66b936ed00a/thumbnail_5505000.jpg","/articles/6080055/North-Dakota/Appropriations-committee-advances-three-budgets-after-votes-on-amendments-to-ethics-commission-funding-and-processes","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6080055-24d84926ad844b04ed17cec1b06279d0/orig.mp4?Expires=1770896153&Signature=M28jW0SM2IXQF0YzOKtYgO144-zxmLyIwbqlPHGpNSvHjiwyCChcn06W4~l3GAdbNINrBJV0ddoMkjiTltQaYMqtevKELhvyGSxb5J~K8-6MQZZd-jBwFpPoY43XJHIeDwo4LQHFFvn2gIeIvKyZAwa-r16uZF1Y8QH~0Ip3tpZJ6-lh5M3ZPeM-7Ah3QlhtCXWr9Mj6ULUheABJ7UtcxA8fHOiB-DdqatL0RlTap2~RR52zNWJiTTvZKzDJcFajCJcfkGxoQnhngPggiN2JLLms72WWqIBOQPmVfOM4f~pFVQBH8rqwwItO1WXgoLaIMBR6vWCAUEzbiJti-qbm7Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The House Appropriations Committee on Tuesday approved three budget bills that the panel’s members said are needed to run the legislative branch and several education programs. Lawmakers voted to advance the budget for the North Dakota Ethics Commission (Senate Bill 2004) after adopting policy changes and restoring a $50,000 one‑time case‑management allocation; they also approved the Department of Career and Technical Education budget (Senate Bill 2019) and the Legislative Council and Assembly budget (Senate Bill 2001).

Ethics commission budget (SB2004): Representative Lausser, presenting the committee’s amendment, said the measure reflects the panel’s effort to balance the commission’s need to process a rising number of complaints with concerns about agency scope and constitutional limits. The amendment adds an automatic‑closure mechanism that requires each complaint be closed within 180 days of receipt unless the commission has taken further action; expands when an accused individual may speak publicly about an allegation; requires an annual public report on complaints and outcomes; and updates immunity and conflict‑of‑interest language for legislators.

Supporters said the changes are intended to limit long, unresolved complaints that officials told the committee can linger for years. Representative Nathie and others argued the 180‑day limit gives the commission a tool to clear matters that have stalled; Representative Hansen said the deadline risks impairing the commission’s constitutional work and objected to removing requested staff and a case‑management system. The committee ultimately restored one‑time funding of $50,000 (SIF) for a case‑management system after debate and votes.

Committee testimony included numbers showing complaint volume has risen: the commission reported 41 complaints in 2024 and 63 complaints so far in 2025. Jonathan Byers of the North Dakota State’s Attorneys Association testified the bill imposes additional duties on county prosecutors and could create new fiscal burdens because local prosecutors would need to investigate and, in some cases, hire outside counsel to avoid ethical conflicts.

Votes at a glance
- SB2004 (Ethics Commission), amendment 02006 adopted: recorded as passed by roll call; amendment vote reported as 14 yes, 7 no, 2 absent. The committee later voted to restore a $50,000 one‑time case‑management allocation (SIF), a motion that passed 13–9 with 1 absent. Final due‑pass motion for SB2004 as amended passed on roll call 19–3 with 1 absent.
- SB2019 (Department of Career & Technical Education), amendment adopted and final bill passed on roll calls reported as 22–0 with 1 absent. The amendment funds $12.75 million in new and expanded CTE grants, including $8 million for new/expanding programs and $750,000 for workforce‑training positions, plus a $1 million SIF for virtual‑reality career exploration and $150,000 placeholder for moving expenses tied to office relocations.
- SB2001 (Legislative Council & Assembly), amendment adopted and final bill passed on roll calls reported as 22–0 with 1 absent. The assembly budget includes payments for 87 legislative session employees, increased session lodging limits tied to a separate law, a planned chamber technology and lighting upgrade, and a transfer of $290,000 from the Secretary of State for public printing tied to session law publications.

Context and implications: The ethics commission debate was the meeting’s most contentious. Proponents of the 180‑day closure and the related policy language argued the public and accused officials deserve timely resolution; opponents said staffing and process changes, not time limits, are the better way to clear backlogs and cautioned that statutory deadlines could conflict with constitutional protections for the independent ethics agency. The committee compromised by adopting policy language and restoring limited one‑time funds for a case‑management tool while declining to add an ongoing education/outreach FTE the commission had requested.

CTE and legislative council items were less controversial in committee. Representative Richter said the CTE amendment funds expanding regional workforce positions, support for CTE centers finishing construction and a $1 million SIF for VR career exploration aimed at middle‑school outreach. Representative Meyer said the Legislative Council amendment includes a planned chamber lighting and video upgrade and funding to accommodate additional legislative staff when the fifteenth floor of the Capitol is used for legislative offices.

What’s next: All three bills were reported favorably to the full House for floor consideration. Conference committees and floor pacing were discussed by the Appropriations chair; members were advised to be prepared if appropriations amendments for other bills are called on higher orders in the coming days.","The House Appropriations Committee voted to advance three appropriation bills: the ethics commission budget (SB2004) with policy and process changes and a restored $50,000 one‑time case management allocation, the Department of Career and Technical Education budget (SB2019), and the Legislative Council and Assembly budget (SB2001).","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee hears lengthy debate on bill to relocate sexually explicit material in schools and public libraries; no vote

Appropriations committee advances three budgets after votes on amendments to ethics commission funding and processes