BISMARCK — A Walsh County man claimed a North Dakota senator violated his First Amendment rights when she blocked him on Facebook. Now, he wants the North Dakota Supreme Court to reject an unfavorable ruling that would force him to pay nearly $5,000 in court fees to the lawmaker.

Mitchell Sanderson, of Park River, North Dakota, argued Monday, Sept. 9, that he shouldn’t have to pay the attorney and court fees to Sen. Janne Myrdal, R-Edinburg. He asked the Supreme Court to roll back Walsh County Judge Kari Agotness’ Jan. 30 ruling, which said Sanderson must pay Myrdal $4,975.

He said Agotness abused her power and shouldn’t have ruled on the case. He also made criminal allegations against Myrdal and Agotness, which have not been brought in a criminal court.

“The crimes and abuses that took place are why we are here today and why I appealed this,” Sanderson said. “All government branches need to be held accountable to the law or we will have more criminal behavior in this country as we are seeing happen to President (Donald) Trump.”

Sanderson initially sued Myrdal in mid-2023 because she blocked him from seeing her Facebook pages. One of the pages is titled “Myrdal ND Senate” and has “all the trappings of a government page,” Sanderson argued.

He claimed that, as a public figure, Myrdal can’t block people on social media because “she does not like them or that they have different views of how the government is to operate.”

“This is a violation of the First Amendment!” Sanderson wrote in his initial lawsuit. “This is censorship by a government public figure which is Illegal and Unconstitutional!”

He asked for $200,000 in damages, as well as the ability to see and post on Myrdal’s Facebook page.

Myrdal has served in the North Dakota Senate since 2017. She declined to comment on this story.

Agotness ruled in December that Myrdal runs her Facebook page without the help of government resources. The page in question was created before she was elected, and Myrdal uses it to campaign for re-election, the judge wrote in her opinion. Myrdal acted as a private citizen, not a government official on behalf of the state, Agotness said.

“If Myrdal’s conduct was purely private, then the First Amendment does not apply because there is not a government abridgment of speech,” Agotness ruled.

Sanderson also sued Agotness, claiming she was biased against him. He demanded $200 million in damages from Agotness and that “the county and state investigate her for criminal actions,” according to the lawsuit that was dismissed by Grand Forks District Judge Jay Knudson.

Agotness also declined to comment for this story.

In his Supreme Court briefing, Sanderson claimed Agotness improperly denied multiple motions he made in the Myrdal case. That included a motion for default judgment in his favor since Myrdal didn’t respond within 21 days of him serving the senator a summons on May 2, 2023.

A court may rule in favor of a person who files a lawsuit if a defendant doesn’t answer within 21 days, Agotness ruled. In a June 3, 2023, email to Walsh County District Court, Myrdal said she hadn’t seen the summons in the case until May 30, 2023.

Myrdal answered the lawsuit four days before Sanderson asked for a default judgment, the judge wrote.

“North Dakota has a strong preference for deciding cases on their merits rather than by default judgment,” Agotness wrote July 10 in court filings that denied the motion for default judgment.

Sanderson claimed Monday the case shouldn’t have moved forward because he didn’t properly serve a summons to Myrdal.

“This is an obvious error by the court which requires reversal,” Sanderson said.

When pressed by North Dakota Supreme Court Justice Daniel Crothers that judges have discretion in declaring default justice or moving forward with a case, Sanderson said the U.S. Constitution and U.S. Supreme Court rulings supersede North Dakota law.

“It’s not the U.S. Supreme Court’s rule. It’s our rule,” Crothers said. “This isn’t a federal case. It’s a state case.”

“You’re bound by the Constitution, sir,” Sanderson said.

The appeal is moot, said Howard Swanson, who represented Myrdal in the lawsuit and at the Supreme Court hearing on Monday. Sanderson is no longer pursuing his First Amendment claims, Swanson said.

“Mr. Sanderson’s rights were not violated by Mrs. Myrdal’s blocking, on her personal Facebook page, his adverse comments,” Swanson said.

In Lindke v. Freed, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled this spring that public officials can sometimes block social media followers. A person must have authority to speak on the government’s behalf and act in an official capacity in order to violate a person’s First Amendment rights by blocking them on social media, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled.

The improper service of documents didn’t prejudice anyone, Swanson said. Improper service to Myrdal was waived because she continued with the case and defended against what Swanson called “absurd” motions filed by Sanderson.

“There was no denial of justice to anyone,” Swanson said. “It allowed the matter to pursue in the normal course of litigation.”

Sanderson called Swanson’s argument “verbal theatrics with the law.” Myrdal had her state-issued email on the page, Sanderson noted.

“Everything she did on it was pretty much political activity,” he said.

In an interview with The Forum, Sanderson said he can’t pursue the First Amendment claims anymore. He said he would go as far as he needs to go with his case.

“If the judges do not rule in favor of the service and default judgment, and they hold up the attorney fees, I will sue any one of the judges that violate their Constitutional oath,” he told The Forum. “Any judge that dissents against me will get sued in federal court.”

Sanderson also accused Myrdal of forgery and evidence tampering, as well as Agotness of corruption and perjury. North Dakota Justice Lisa McEvers suggested those allegations should be handled by a criminal court, not in a civil case.

Sanderson said the Walsh County State’s Attorney’s Office will “defend the state at all costs.” He said he has brought his evidence to the FBI but claimed the Department of Justice under President Joe Biden wouldn’t address the allegations.

“We have to wait for President Trump to get in,” he said. “This is not stopping her today, folks.”

He said more lawsuits are coming from him, as well as criminal charges.

“Trump is coming,” he said. “His DOJ is coming.”

Republicans have criticized a jury verdict that found Trump guilty in a hush-money case earlier this year. He also faces several federal indictments, including in connection to the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection in Washington, D.C., where masses tried to overturn the 2020 election results that said he lost to Biden.

Sanderson filed a lawsuit against the North Dakota Republican Party after it kicked him out in 2022. He said he tried to run against Myrdal at the District 19 nominating meeting.

He and the NDGOP agreed to dismiss the case.