North Dakota SB 2044 — Critical Infrastructure (2019)

• Law: North Dakota Senate Bill 2044, amending N.D.C.C. § 12.1-21-07 and adding § 12.1-21-07.1
• Passed: March 2019
• Vote: North Dakota Senate 44–3; House 79–14 (near-unanimous)
• Signed by: Governor Doug Burgum
• Context: Passed three years after the Standing Rock / Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) protests of 2016–2017

What It Does

SB 2044 is North Dakota's second major round of critical infrastructure legislation (following earlier 2017 measures). It:

• Felony for infrastructure "tampering" — Tampering with, damaging, or interfering with pipeline infrastructure is a Class A felony (up to 20 years imprisonment for serious cases).
• Enhanced trespass penalties — Trespass on critical infrastructure facilities is elevated to a Class A misdemeanor for a first offense and a Class C felony for subsequent offenses.
• Organizational liability — Expands liability to organizations that direct, authorize, or "ratify" infrastructure trespass by their members or associates.
• Unmanned aircraft restrictions — Prohibits the use of drones to surveil or disrupt critical infrastructure operations (a response to activists using drones at Standing Rock).

Why Critics Oppose It

• Directly targets Standing Rock-style protest — North Dakota legislators explicitly cited the 2016–2017 Standing Rock protests when debating SB 2044. The law is a direct institutional response to indigenous-led pipeline resistance.
• Criminalizes indigenous land rights activism — The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and other indigenous nations argued the DAPL crossed treaty lands and threatened the Missouri River water supply. SB 2044 makes future protests of that type a felony.
• Drone ban eliminates accountability tool — Activists used drones at Standing Rock to document law enforcement conduct and pipeline construction. The drone ban removes a key transparency and accountability tool.
• 20-year penalty for "tampering" — The Class A felony "tampering" charge can be applied to activists who chained themselves to equipment, removed survey stakes, or interfered with construction equipment — conduct that would be misdemeanor vandalism or trespass under ordinary law.
• Federal treaty questions unresolved — The US Army Corps of Engineers' easement approval process for DAPL was contested in federal court. SB 2044 criminalizes protest of infrastructure projects whose legal basis is itself disputed.

Constitutional Concerns

• 1st Amendment (assembly, petition, speech) — felony penalties for protest activity near infrastructure with direct political significance (treaty rights, water supply) chill core protected speech.
• Treaty rights (Article VI, Supremacy Clause) — North Dakota state law criminalizing protest of federally approved (but treaty-contested) infrastructure intersects with unresolved federal treaty obligations.
• 4th Amendment — drone ban restricts citizens' ability to surveil government and corporate conduct in contested spaces.
• Equal protection — the law disproportionately affects indigenous people exercising treaty-based rights to object to infrastructure on their ancestral territory.

Part of a Pattern

North Dakota SB 2044 is the third major wave bill after Oklahoma HB 1123 (2017) and Louisiana HB 727 (2018). It added new elements — organizational liability expansion and drone restrictions — that subsequent state bills adopted. See State Critical Infrastructure Laws.

Why This Matters for We The Citizens

A North Dakota legislator who voted YES voted to make future Standing Rock-style indigenous protests a felony. This is one of the clearest cases where critical infrastructure laws are used to suppress a specific politically disfavored protest movement rather than prevent genuine sabotage.

See also: Bad Laws Overview | Oklahoma HB 1123 | State Critical Infrastructure Laws