North Dakota
North Dakota Supreme Court Considers Motion to Reinstate Abortion Ban While Appeal is Pending
The North Dakota Supreme Court hears arguments involving abortion via Zoom on Nov. 21, 2024. (Screenshot Bismarck Tribune via the North Dakota Monitor)
(North Dakota Monitor) – North Dakota’s solicitor general called on the North Dakota Supreme Court to reinstate an abortion law struck down by a lower court until a final decision in the case is made, arguing that the ban must remain in effect because the state has a compelling interest in protecting unborn life.
“We say that not to be dramatic, but because the district court seems to have lost sight of that,” Phil Axt told justices Thursday.
The ban, signed into law by Gov. Doug Burgum in April 2023, made abortion illegal in all cases except rape or incest if the mother has been pregnant for less than six weeks, or when the pregnancy poses a serious physical health threat.
South Central Judicial District Court Judge Bruce Romanick vacated the law in September, declaring it unconstitutionally vague and an infringement on medical freedom.
He further wrote that “pregnant women in North Dakota have a fundamental right to choose abortion before viability exists.”
The law went into effect just weeks after the North Dakota Supreme Court ruled the state’s previous abortion ban unconstitutional and found that women have a right to seek an abortion for health reasons.
Axt argued Thursday that Romanick’s judgment striking down the 2023 law conflicts with the Supreme Court’s prior ruling, and that Romanick’s legal analysis contains “glaring errors.” Axt claimed there’s nothing in the state constitution that supports a right to abortion until the point of viability.
“It’s been clear since our territorial days that in order to justify killing another human being, there must be a threat of death or serious bodily injury,” Axt said.
Meetra Mehdizadeh, an attorney representing the plaintiffs, said to reverse Romanick’s decision even temporarily would be to disregard many serious problems he identified with the statute.
The ban does not sufficiently explain to doctors when they may legally provide abortions — which chills their ability to provide necessary health care for fear of prosecution, she said.
“The district court correctly held that the ban violates the rights of both physicians and patients, and staying the judgment and allowing the state to continue to enforce an unconstitutional law would be nonsensical,” Mehdizadeh said.
Axt countered that the law is not vague, and that doctors are incorrect to assume they would face criminal penalties for good-faith medical decisions.
If doctors are confused about the ban, said Axt, “the solution is not striking down the law — it is providing some professional education.”
In briefs filed with the court, the state also argued that Romanick’s judgment vacating the law seems to conflict with his original order declaring the law unconstitutional.
While the order identifies a right to abortion until the point of fetal viability, Romanick’s judgment does not include any reference to viability. The state is now confused as to whether it can now enforce any restrictions on abortion, Axt said.
North Dakota still must observe abortion regulations established under other laws not challenged in the lawsuit, Mehdizadeh said.
Axt further claimed that Romanick’s judgment should be put on hold because it addresses a “novel” area of law, and because it takes a supermajority of the Supreme Court to declare a statute unconstitutional.
“Statutes should not be presumed unconstitutional until this court has had an opportunity to weigh in on the matter, and a super majority of this court is of that opinion,” Axt said.
Justice Daniel Crothers said he questioned Axt’s logic.
“Any novel issue where the district court declares something unconstitutional, it’s sounding like you’re suggesting that we should presume that it’s wrong,” Crothers said to Axt.
The appeal is the latest step in a lawsuit brought against the state by a group of reproductive health care doctors and a Moorhead, Minnesota-based abortion provider, Red River Women’s Clinic. The clinic previously operated in Fargo, but moved across the state line after Roe v. Wade was overturned in 2022.
The ban, passed with overwhelming support by both chambers of the Republican-dominated Legislature, set penalties of up to five years in prison and a maximum fine of $10,000 for any health care professionals found in violation of the law.
The arguments were only on whether Romanick’s decision should be put on hold during the appeal, not on the merits of the case itself, which the Supreme Court will consider separately. The justices took the matter under advisement.
North Dakota
How two property tax credits could reduce — or eliminate — 2026 tax bills
DICKINSON — Property tax bills are arriving, and as inflation, taxes and property values continue to rise, many North Dakota homeowners are feeling the strain of higher household expenses.
Two state programs — the primary residence credit and the homestead property tax credit — aim to ease that burden by reducing, and in some cases eliminating, property taxes for eligible homeowners.
The primary residence credit provides a flat credit of up to $1,600 for qualifying homeowners, regardless of age or income. The homestead credit, meanwhile, reduces the taxable value of a home for seniors and individuals with disabilities, significantly lowering or eliminating their tax bill.
Eligible households may apply for both credits, further reducing the amount owed.
Primary residence credit: Who qualifies and how much is available
The primary residence credit was originally capped at $500 in 2023. In 2025, lawmakers increased the credit to $1,600 after Gov. Kelly Armstrong signed House Bill 1176 into law on May 3, 2025.
To qualify, a homeowner must own and occupy a home in North Dakota as their primary residence. Eligible properties include houses,
mobile homes
, townhomes, duplexes and condominiums. Homes held in trust also qualify. There are no age or income limits, and only one credit is allowed per household.
The credit may be applied up to the amount of property tax owed.
“We’re asking the public to take just a few minutes — please come to us, tell us who you are,” State Tax Commissioner Brian Kroshus said during a press briefing at the Capitol on Dec. 19. “That is the difference between applying the credit across the board and diluting it for everyone or having a larger credit amount of $1,600.”
Armstrong also highlighted the impact of the expanded credit in an
opinion column
.
“Since we more than tripled the credit to $1,600, the number of households paying no property taxes in 2025 has increased to 50,000,” he wrote.
Homestead property tax credit: Using health expenses to qualify
Unlike the primary residence credit, the homestead credit reduces the taxable value of a qualifying home.
To be eligible, applicants must be 65 or older or have a permanent or total disability, own and occupy the home as their primary residence, and have a household income of $70,000 or less. There is no age requirement for individuals with disabilities. Only one spouse may apply if a married couple lives together.
Households earning $40,000 or less may qualify for a 100% reduction in taxable value, up to $9,000. Those earning between $40,001 and $70,000 may qualify for a 50% reduction, up to $4,500.
Out-of-pocket medical expenses can be deducted when calculating household income. Eligible expenses include unreimbursed medical costs paid during the prior year for the homeowner, spouse or dependents. Subtracting those expenses may move applicants into a lower income tier or help them qualify.
Stark County Auditor and Treasurer
Karen Richard
said the credit has eliminated tax bills for many approved applicants.
“Out of the 725 approved homestead credit applications, there were 355 applicants who had a zero-dollar tax bill just from receiving the homestead credit,” Richard said.
She added that participation remains low.
“There are most likely many more seniors who qualify but do not realize the homestead credit exists,” Richard said. “Any way possible to get the word out could really help individuals living on fixed incomes.”
Applying for both credits
Some households qualify for both programs. The homestead credit is applied first, followed by the primary residence credit.
“By applying for and receiving both credits, an additional 149 applicants received a zero-dollar tax bill,” Richard said. “Out of 725 approved homestead applicants, 504 owed nothing for 2025 property taxes.”
It’s also important to note that either credit applies to special assessments, which may still result in a balance owed.
Applications for both credits must be submitted to a local assessor or county director of tax equalization between Jan. 1 and April 1 of the year the credit is requested. For 2026 taxes, the deadline is April 1, 2026.
Sarah Ruffin, who processes homestead and veterans credit applications for Stark County, encouraged seniors to seek assistance if needed.
“If you are over 65, own your home and earn under $70,000 per year, come talk to me about the homestead credit,” Ruffin said.
Homestead credit applications are available at
tax.nd.gov/homestead
.Primary residence credit applications must be completed online at
tax.nd.gov/prc
.
“The pen is mightier than the sword.”
As a professional writer with more than 10 years of experience, Kelly lives by these words. With a bachelor’s degree in communication, majoring in broadcasting and journalism, and a fiery passion for writing that began in childhood, she uses the power of words to make an impact in the community — informing, educating, and entertaining a wide range of audiences.
As a journalist, what Kelly loves most about her job is the ability to bring unique stories to the public and give people a voice that can be heard around the world. Whether through print or digital platforms, her goal is to share stories people enjoy reading while spreading valuable information that supports the welfare of southwest North Dakota and its people.
North Dakota
North Dakota U.S Rep. Julie Fedorchak announces reelection campaign
North Dakota
Letter: Why do North Dakota Republican politicians fear ethics?
Ethics is a system of moral principles guiding behavior, defining what’s right, wrong, fair, and good for individuals and society, essentially asking, “What should we do?”
A commission is a group of people officially charged with a particular function.
The citizens of North Dakota voted for and passed an Ethics Commission measure. The Ethics Commission has infuriated the North Dakota Republican legislators and North Dakota government in general. (NOTE: Every elected state government official in North Dakota is Republican.) They have denied that any monitoring of ethics is needed.
North Dakota Republicans have done everything possible to make sure the Ethics Commission has virtually no teeth, no say, and remains invisible under constant attack by the Attorney General’s Office.
Why do Go. Armstrong, Attorney General Wrigley and the Republican members of the North Dakota Legislature fear ethics?
Henry Lebak lives in Bismarck.
-
World1 week agoHamas builds new terror regime in Gaza, recruiting teens amid problematic election
-
Indianapolis, IN1 week agoIndianapolis Colts playoffs: Updated elimination scenario, AFC standings, playoff picture for Week 17
-
News1 week agoRoads could remain slick, icy Saturday morning in Philadelphia area, tracking another storm on the way
-
Politics1 week agoMost shocking examples of Chinese espionage uncovered by the US this year: ‘Just the tip of the iceberg’
-
World1 week agoPodcast: The 2025 EU-US relationship explained simply
-
News1 week agoFor those who help the poor, 2025 goes down as a year of chaos
-
News1 week agoWinter storm brings heavy snow and ice to busy holiday travel weekend
-
Politics1 week ago‘Unlucky’ Honduran woman arrested after allegedly running red light and crashing into ICE vehicle