North Dakota Supreme Court Blocks Effort to Weaken Term Limits

The North Dakota Supreme Court blocked a legislative attempt to weaken state term limits on Thursday, ruling that lawmakers lacked the constitutional authority to propose the change. This decision prevents Senate Concurrent Resolution 4008 from appearing on the November 2026 ballot, according to court records.

Chief Justice Fair McEvers wrote in the court’s opinion that the state constitution reserves the power to alter term limits to the people. The court found that the Legislative Assembly does not have the authority to propose the amendment in question.

Why did the court block the term limits proposal?

The court ruled that the legislature exceeded its constitutional authority. Under Article XV, Section 4 of the state constitution, the legislature is explicitly prohibited from proposing amendments to alter or repeal term limits.

The court focused on the legal term “notwithstanding,” which means “despite” or “in spite of.” According to the ruling, this word establishes a plain limit on the Legislative Assembly’s authority, meaning its general power to propose constitutional amendments doesn’t apply to term limits.

Did You Know? North Dakota voters approved the original term limits initiative in November 2022, and the rules officially took effect on Jan. 1, 2023.

What changes was the legislature seeking?

The 2025 proposal, Senate Concurrent Resolution 4008, sought to change the current eight-year cumulative service limit for state representatives and senators. The measure would have shifted this to four complete four-year terms, which would effectively double the time lawmakers could serve.

ND Supreme Court: Term limits lawsuit

Additionally, the proposal aimed to repeal the constitutional provision that prevents the legislature from proposing future changes to term limits. Petitioners Terence B. Bjerke and Leverrett Oley Larsen, members of the original 2022 initiative committee, challenged the move in court.

Expert Insight: Samantha Carter notes that this ruling reinforces the legal boundary between legislative action and voter-led initiatives. By upholding the “notwithstanding” clause, the court has affirmed that certain constitutional safeguards are insulated from legislative interference, leaving the power of change solely in the hands of the electorate.

What happens next for North Dakota term limits?

The court’s decision is final, and the measure will not be placed on the November 2026 ballot. If the legislature wants to change the current limits, it would need to respect the constitutional restriction.

A possible next step for those seeking change would be to use the initiative process. This is the same method voters used to establish the limits in 2022. The court also denied a request for attorney’s fees, citing the “American Rule” where each party pays its own legal costs.

Frequently Asked Questions

What were the original term limits set in 2022?
Voters approved a limit of eight cumulative years of service for state representatives and senators in their respective chambers.

Who brought the legal challenge against the legislature?
Terence B. Bjerke and Leverrett Oley Larsen, both members of the original 2022 term limits initiative committee, filed the challenge.

Can the legislature ever change these limits?
According to the court, the authority to alter or repeal term limits is reserved exclusively to the people through the initiative process.

Do you believe term limits should be decided solely by voters or by the legislature?