The North Dakota House Appropriations Committee issued a 22–1 “Do Not Pass” recommendation on Senate Bill 2307, sending a strong message that censorship bill is not only poor policy but also a waste of taxpayer dollars. The Committee rejected the bill sponsor’s last-minute policy amendment, opting instead to advance the bill to the full House with the original $2 million fiscal note still attached. This is a major win for advocates of local control, fiscal responsibility, and the First Amendment.

The Appropriations Committee typically focuses on financial matters rather than policy debates. However, today’s discussion revealed deep flaws in SB 2307’s process and content. Committee members raised crucial questions:

  • Why introduce a substantive policy change at the last minute to an appropriations committee?
  • Were all key stakeholders, including the State Library, school librarians, and public library leaders, consulted in developing the bill?
  • Were any librarians or professional library associations meaningfully engaged in shaping this proposal?

The answer was unequivocally no. This lack of stakeholder consultation and the hurried nature of the amendment concerned committee members, who emphasized the need for due process and inclusive policymaking. We want to thank Representatives Brandy Pyle, Jon Nelson, Eric Murphy, David Richter, Emily O’Brien, Karla Rose Hanson, Alisa Mitskog, and Steve Swiontek for their pointed questions and vocal concerns.

In a significant development, the North Dakota State’s Attorneys’ Association testified in opposition to SB 2307. Their public opposition highlights the problematic nature of this bill. The Association warned of potential enforcement issues, the burden on already overextended local prosecutors, and the risk of politically motivated complaints flooding their offices. Their testimony reinforces what library advocates have long argued: this bill is vague, unworkable, and likely unconstitutional.

Send a message to the Governor that SB 2307 is a bad idea for North Dakota: www.righttoreadnd.org/vetosb2307

The bill's most visible cost is the $2 million appropriation intended for unnecessary and duplicative online content filters. The proposed system would be applied to the statewide ODIN database, which already operates under the federal Children's Internet Protection Act (CIPA) requirements. There is no need for additional filtering.

However, the hidden costs are even more concerning:

  • Litigation and liability: The bill exposes cities and counties to lawsuits and increased insurance costs by creating vague standards for access and allowing anyone—including out-of-state activists—to file enforcement complaints.
  • Remodeling and re-staffing: Local libraries, many of which are housed in one-room facilities, may be forced to reconfigure spaces, revise entire collections, or hire additional staff just to comply.
  • New taxes: The fiscal burden of compliance will fall on local governments, potentially requiring them to impose new or increased taxes to cover expenses.

SB 2307 sponsors say it will address a problem, but that problem does not exist. Libraries in North Dakota already maintain robust collection development and reconsideration policies. Children’s materials are carefully curated and do not contain content that would violate HB 1205, which already governs explicit materials. Rather than supporting local decision-making, SB 2307 would undermine local control, strain library budgets, and infringe upon access to information.

Now that the Appropriations Committee has done its job and put policy and smart use of tax dollars before politics, the fight moves to the House Floor. It is now up to the full House to consider the fiscal, legal, and constitutional consequences of advancing Senate Bill 2307. We urge all North Dakotans to contact their state representatives and ask them to vote NO on SB 2307. Let’s protect our libraries, preserve local control, and uphold the right to read.