WeVote
Log In

Bill

WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 997

Summary — HB 997: "Certify Reading of NC Constitution"

Status: Introduced (filed Apr 10, 2025). If enacted, effective date: January 1, 2027. Sponsor(s): Rep. Riddell (primary); additional primary sponsors listed include Turner, Scott, and Brody.

Purpose / Intent

The bill adds a pre-oath certification requirement for members of the North Carolina General Assembly. Its stated purpose is to ensure that each legislator affirms whether they have reviewed the text of the United States Constitution and the North Carolina Constitution within the prior two years before taking the oath of office.

Key provisions

  • Amends G.S. 11‑7 (the constitutional oath statute).
  • Leaves the existing oath language unchanged.
  • Adds a new requirement that, prior to taking the oath of office, every member of the General Assembly must certify to the Principal Clerk of the chamber (House or Senate) whether they have read, listened to, or otherwise reviewed a copy of:
    • the United States Constitution, and
    • the North Carolina Constitution within the previous two years.
  • The certification is a binary attestation (whether or not the member has reviewed the Constitutions within the two‑year period). The bill text does not specify penalties, verification procedures, record-retention rules, or sanctions for false statements.

Who is affected

  • Directly: Members of the North Carolina General Assembly (incoming House and Senate members) at the time they take office.
  • Administratively: Principal Clerks of the House and Senate, who would receive (and likely retain) the certifications; possibly legislative staff for processing or recordkeeping.
  • No changes are made to requirements for other state officers or public employees.

Procedural / timeline aspects

  • Filed April 10, 2025; referred to committee (State and Local Government, with subsequent referral to Rules in the House).
  • If enacted, the certification requirement takes effect January 1, 2027, and applies to members taking office on or after that date.

Potential impacts and considerations

  • Administrative: Minimal operational impact expected — collecting a simple attestation from each member prior to oath-taking; some clerical time and recordkeeping will be needed.
  • Substantive: The change is largely procedural/symbolic. It does not mandate a specific curriculum, testing, or a remedial requirement for members who have not reviewed the Constitutions.
  • Enforcement & legal questions: Because the bill provides no enforcement mechanism or penalties for false certification, compliance would rely on self-attestation. Questions could arise about the public availability of the certifications and retention policies.
  • Constitutional/legal risk: The bill creates a prerequisite administrative step for oath-taking but does not change the substance of the constitutional oath itself. Any constitutional challenges would likely focus on procedure; no obvious substantive conflict is apparent from the bill text.

If you’d like, I can draft a one-page memo explaining likely administrative steps for Principal Clerks to implement the certification (form language, recordkeeping options, and suggested guidance for members).

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

Sign in to ask a question.