Summary — HB 1613 (North Dakota): Law Enforcement Use of Robots and Unmanned Aerial Vehicles
Status & sponsors
- Introduced: December 13, 2024. Committee report prepared Feb 5, 2025. Filed with Secretary of State: April 28, 2025.
- Primary sponsors (ND versions): Reps. Hendrix, Christianson, Koppelman, VanWinkle, Toman; Sens. Castaneda, Magrum, Paulson.
- Subject: Amendments to ND Century Code sections 29‑29.4‑01 through 29‑29.4‑06 and creation of a new section in chapter 29‑01 concerning law‑enforcement use of drones (unmanned aerial vehicles, UAVs) and robots.
Purpose and intent
- To regulate and limit how law enforcement agencies may deploy robots and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), to protect privacy and civil‑liberties interests, to require transparency and documentation, and to set evidentiary and retention rules for data collected by these systems.
Key provisions and changes
- Definitions expanded: introduces/clarifies terms such as “robot” (powered machine capable of autonomous or semi‑autonomous operation), “autonomously,” “remotely,” “less than lethal weapon,” “lethal weapon,” “flight data,” and “flight information.”
- New prohibitions (chapter 29‑01 new section + 29‑29.4 provisions):
- Law enforcement may not use a drone or robot to serve or issue arrest warrants/summonses, take individuals into custody, conduct hostage negotiations, manage traffic, gather evidence without a warrant, or monitor public events without a warrant (with limited public‑safety exceptions).
- Agencies may not authorize arming UAVs/robots with lethal weapons. Deployment of lethal force from a robot is narrowly limited: it must be remote (not autonomous), and may be used only to neutralize an explosive/inanimate device or to prevent imminent, substantial risk of death/serious injury where lethal force by an officer would be legally justified.
- Prohibits law enforcement authorization of private persons using UAVs/robots to surveil private individuals without express, informed consent.
- Prohibits (subject to narrow exceptions) surveillance of the lawful exercise of constitutional rights (e.g., protests).
- Warrant and evidentiary rules:
- Evidence or information collected by a UAV/robot is inadmissible in prosecutions unless obtained under a search warrant or an established exception to the warrant requirement.
- Information from UAVs/robots generally may not be used in affidavits to obtain a separate search warrant (with narrow exceptions such as public land or border monitoring).
- Warrants authorizing surveillance must meet ND constitutional requirements and include a “data collection statement” describing who may authorize use, locations, max operating period per flight/deployment, whether data about individuals will be collected, the circumstances, types of data, retention periods, and destruction protocols.
- Exceptions:
- Permitted uses without prior warrant include border patrol within 25 miles of international borders, exigent circumstances (reasonable suspicion of imminent danger to life/bodily harm), environmental/weather catastrophe response, and authorized research/education/training/testing by higher‑education collaborators.
- Documentation and retention:
- Operators must document every UAV/robot surveillance deployment (duration, flight path, mission objective).
- Supervisory verification of flight information is required.
- Flight information must be retained for five years.
- Imaging/data that are not accompanied by reasonable/articulable suspicion of criminal relevance may not be retained for more than 90 days.
- Certain operational/technical information may be withheld for security; defendants retain access to relevant surveillance data subject to limitations.
Who is affected
- Primary: state and local law enforcement agencies and officers who operate or authorize UAVs/robots.
- Secondary: members of the public whose activities may be observed by these technologies, private entities seeking permission to use law‑enforcement UAV/robot capabilities, and courts evaluating admissibility of evidence derived from these systems.
Procedural/timeline notes
- The bill amends six existing sections (29‑29.4‑01 through ‑06) and adds a new chapter 29‑01 section governing use of drones/robots.
- Committee report and multiple engrossed versions show iterative amendments refining definitions, warrant requirements, exceptions, and limitations on weaponization and data use.
- Some source documents were truncated; this summary captures the central, consistent provisions across introduced and amended versions.
Practical impact
- Tightens legal and procedural controls over government use of UAVs/robots, increases documentation and transparency obligations, constrains weaponization and warrantless surveillance, and strengthens privacy protections and evidence admissibility limits. Agencies will need to update policies, training, and recordkeeping to comply.
