WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 1309

A BILL for an Act to create and enact a new section to chapter 54-06 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to state contracts with certain companies that boycott energy, mining, and production agriculture; and to provide for application.

69th Legislative Assembly (2025-26) Introduced by Mark Enget and 5 co-sponsors

HB 1309 bars state and local contracts with private firms that boycott certain energy, agriculture, firearms, or mining activities, requiring a signed non-boycott verification.

Second reading, failed to pass, yeas 12 nays 76
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 1309

HB 1309 — Summary (North Dakota draft)

Purpose

HB 1309 would prohibit state and local governmental entities in North Dakota from entering into new public contracts with private, for‑profit companies that the state determines are engaging in certain “boycott” activities targeting critical sectors (energy, mining, production agriculture, and related businesses). It conditions state contracting on a contractor’s written verification that it does not engage in such boycotts and is not on a list of ineligible financial institutions.

Key provisions

  • Creates a new section in NDCC chapter 54‑06 establishing a contracting prohibition tied to “boycotts” of specified industries.
  • Requires most public contracts (those paid wholly or in part with public funds) to include written verification from the company that:
    • the company does not engage in a defined “boycott” of covered sectors, and
    • the company is not included on the State Investment Board’s list of financial institutions ineligible to receive state investments.
  • Defines “company” to mean a for‑profit entity (corporation, partnership, LLC, etc.) that has ten or more full‑time employees and a value of $100,000 or more; sole proprietorships are excluded.
  • Defines “boycott” as, without ordinary business purpose, refusing to deal with or otherwise taking actions intended to penalize or economically harm a company because it:
    • engages in exploration/production/use/transportation/sale/manufacturing of fossil fuel‑based energy, timber, minerals, hydroelectric or nuclear energy, or mining and does not pledge environmental standards beyond applicable law;
    • engages in production agriculture;
    • engages in or supports the manufacture/import/distribution/marketing/sale or lawful use of firearms/ammunition/parts; or
    • does business with a company engaged in the foregoing activities.
  • “Ordinary business purpose” is narrowly defined (financial success, risk mitigation, legal compliance, limiting liability).
  • Exemptions: the verification requirement does not apply if the governmental entity documents that the goods/services are not available on commercially reasonable terms or if the requirement conflicts with the governmental entity’s constitutional or statutory duties.
  • Application: applies to contracts entered after the Act’s effective date; existing contracts that violate the Act may not be renewed without the required verification.

Who would be affected

  • State agencies and political subdivisions procuring goods/services with public funds.
  • Private vendors meeting the bill’s company threshold (≥10 employees and ≥$100,000 value).
  • The State Investment Board (its ineligible‑financial‑institution list is referenced).
  • Procurement and contracting offices (additional verification, documentation, and compliance steps).

Potential impacts and considerations

  • Could narrow the pool of eligible contractors for public procurements and increase administrative burdens on procurement offices.
  • May affect firms with ESG (environmental, social, governance) policies or those that choose to limit business relationships for reputational/regulatory reasons.
  • Legal risk: similar statutes in other states have led to litigation (First Amendment, commerce clause, preemption, or other legal challenges); HB 1309’s definitions and enforcement mechanisms could be subject to judicial review.
  • Businesses below the employee/value thresholds (and sole proprietorships) would be unaffected by the verification requirement.

Legislative/ procedural notes

  • Bill text introduced in the 69th Legislative Assembly (draft numbering 25.0082.01000).
  • Sponsors listed in the draft: Representatives Heilman, Marschall, Novak, M. Ruby; Senators Enget, Walen.
  • Section 2 makes the measure effective for contracts entered after the bill’s effective date; renewals of pre‑existing contracts would require the verification to be renewed.

(Prepared from the bill text establishing NDCC § 54‑06 — as provided; does not evaluate constitutionality or likely legal outcomes.)

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.