‘Prudent remedy' for veto error is special session, Legislative Council advises
Gov. Kelly Armstrong speaks during a meeting of the Senate Appropriations Committee on March 27, 2025. (Michael Achterling/North Dakota Monitor)
Legal staff for North Dakota's legislative branch concluded the 'prudent remedy' to correct an error with Gov. Kelly Armstrong's line-item veto would be for the governor to call a special session, according to a memo issued Friday.
But Attorney General Drew Wrigley, who is working on a separate opinion, maintains that Legislative Council has no role in determining the execution of the governor's veto.
Armstrong announced May 22 a 'markup error' with a line-item veto that crossed out $35 million for a state housing development fund. The red X over the funding did not match what Armstrong indicated in his veto message that explained his reasoning.
North Dakota governor unintentionally vetoes $35 million for housing programs
A Legislative Council memo distributed to lawmakers Friday concluded that legal precedent supports the marked-up bill as the official veto document. 'Engaging in interpretive gymnastics' to disregard the markings on the bill could lead to unintended consequences in the future, Legislative Council concluded.
Emily Thompson, legal division director for Legislative Council, said the Legislature needs to have an objective document to clearly illustrate what was vetoed, such as the specific veto markings on the bill, so lawmakers can exercise their veto override authority effectively.
Lawmakers have six days remaining in their 80-day limit and could call themselves back into session to address the veto. However, the memo cautions that the Legislature may need those days to reconvene to respond to federal funding issues or other unforeseen reasons. Legislative Council recommends the governor call a special session, which would not count against the 80-day limit.
A special session of the Legislature costs about $65,000 per day, according to Legislative Council.
Armstrong is waiting for an attorney general's opinion to determine the next steps, according to a statement from his office. He previously said he would call a special session if necessary.
Wrigley said Friday it's up to his office to assess the situation and issue an opinion on the governor's question.
'The power in question is strictly the governor's power and it has to be in compliance with the constitution and laws of North Dakota,' Wrigley said. 'That's the only assessment here. There's no role for this in Legislative Council. They have no authority in this regard.'
Armstrong on May 19 issued two line-item vetoes in Senate Bill 2014, the budget for the state Industrial Commission. His veto message explained his reasons for objecting to a $150,000 one-time grant for a Native American-focused organization to fund a homelessness liaison position. But the marking also crossed out $25 million for housing projects and programs and $10 million to combat homelessness, which he later said he did not intend to veto.
Chris Joseph, general counsel for Armstrong, wrote in a request for an attorney general's opinion that the markings served as a 'color-coded visual aid,' and the veto message should control the extent of the veto.
Wrigley said his office is working on the opinion and aware that resolution of the issue is time sensitive.
Bills passed by the Legislature with appropriations attached to them, such as the Industrial Commission budget, go into effect July 1.
'I look forward to publishing my opinion on that at the earliest possible time,' he said.
The Legislative Council memo states, 'It would not be appropriate to allow the governor and attorney general to resolve the ambiguity by agreement.'
In addition, Legislative Council concluded that if the governor's veto message is to be considered the controlling document for vetoes in the future, more ambiguities would likely be 'inevitable and frequent' and require resolution through the courts.
The memo cites a 2018 North Dakota Supreme Court opinion involving a case between the Legislature and then-Gov. Doug Burgum that ruled 'a veto is complete and irrevocable upon return of the vetoed bill to the originating house,' and further stated the governor does not have the power to 'withdraw a veto.'
'Setting a precedent of the attorney general issuing a letter saying we can just go ahead and interpret the governor's veto message to mean what was, or was not, vetoed, that's a really concerning precedent to set,' Thompson said in an interview.
Wrigley said any issues resulting from the opinion could be addressed by the courts.
'I sincerely hope that they (Legislative Council) are not trying to somehow publicly advocate, or attempt to influence a process for which they have no role,' Wrigley said.
Legislative Council memo
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
an hour ago
- Axios
Abbott vetoes Texas THC ban
Gov. Greg Abbott on Sunday night vetoed the THC ban bill pushed by his fellow Republicans in the Texas Legislature. Why it matters: The move secures the future of the state's multibillion-dollar hemp industry and keeps those who rely on legal THC products with more options — for now. It also articulates a divide among Texas conservatives in how they view cannabis and how to address its rising popularity. Between the lines: Abbott waited to act less than an hour before the midnight deadline to veto bills. Driving the news: Senate Bill 3 sought to ban the possession, sale and manufacture of all THC products — including consumable delta-8 THC which Texas lawmakers legalized in 2019. Context: Delta-8 THC is a minor chemical variant of the main psychoactive ingredient in traditional cannabis and provides lesser psychoactive effects. It can be coupled with CBD, another hemp-derived compound used for pain relief and mental wellness. In 2019, Abbott signed the Texas farm bill, which partly legalized products containing small amounts of hemp-derived delta-8 THC, including edibles, beverages, vapes and traditional bud. Catch up quick: Last year, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick vowed that Texas would once again criminalize all forms of THC after claiming products were being sold with "unlimited THC" and marketed to children with "life-threatening" consequences. The Senate passed SB 3 26-5 in March, and the House followed suit with an 87-54 vote in May. Flashback: Thousands of veterans, business owners and THC proponents sent Abbott letters urging him to veto the bill. The big picture: The move comes as Abbott this weekend expanded the state's medical marijuana program, opening it up for people with chronic pain, traumatic brain injury, Crohn's disease and in palliative care, and as more states have loosened cannabis restrictions in recent years.
Boston Globe
16 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Mass. considers scrapping religious exemptions for vaccinations
Advertisement In Massachusetts, parents can write a letter stating that a vaccine conflicts with their 'sincerely held religious belief' in order to exempt their children from vaccination requirements needed to enroll in public schools. State Rep. Andy Vargas and State Sen. Edward Kennedy both Advocates who oppose the exemptions say that religious exceptions are being misused by parents who are hesitant about vaccinating their children. Advertisement 'It's definitely a general pattern of people abusing the exemption, especially since But parents across the state came to Beacon Hill to testify in support of religious exemptions at a hearing of the Legislature's Joint Committee on Public Health. They said exemptions were essential to their first amendment right to practice their religion and to honor the concept of informed consent. 'I'm curious why diversity, equity and inclusion is not being applied to those with sincerely held religious beliefs,' Lisa Ottaviano said while testifying at the hearing. Some speakers at the hearing said they were uncomfortable with the components of certain vaccines. 'We should not be forced into violating our moral conscience by injecting products developed from aborted fetuses such as the MMR, the varicella vaccines,' said Nicholas Kottenstette, a Catholic father of four from Sterling, Massachusetts. Vaccines don't contain fetal cells, Others testifying against the bill said they wanted to protect religious exemptions because they felt that accountability measures for vaccine manufacturers were insufficient. 'I started meeting more people whose children had reactions to vaccines that were adverse, so I started doing my own research and learnt a lot of concerning things like how pharmaceutical companies have legal protection against being sued,' Maureen Trettel, a grandmother from Milford said. Advertisement Similar bills have been filed in previous sessions, so the debate over religious exemptions for vaccines in Massachusetts has been going on since at least 2019, well before the COVID-19 pandemic that made vaccines a polarizing issue. The elevation of Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a vaccine skeptic, to U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services has drawn even more interest to the issue. Last week, Kennedy Logan Beyer, an aspiring pediatrician pursuing an MD/PhD degree in public health at Harvard, spoke in favor of eliminating religious exemptions. While volunteering at a Special Olympics event, Beyer spoke to a parent who told her that she was worried that vaccines caused autism. The mother told Beyer that she was planning to apply for a religious exemption because she was unsure about vaccinating her children. 'She told me that her family 'didn't really go to church' but you don't have to prove anything to get the exemption,' Beyer said. Beyer said that this incident made her concerned about growing vaccine hesitancy and inspired her to testify. 'At the hearing, so many parents said they just want to do what's best for their children … I love that instinct,' Beyer said, 'But I know that passing policies that help facilitate more kids getting vaccinated is really what can keep children safe.' Advertisement Harrison, mother of cancer-survivor Miranda, also understands the instinct of parents on the other side of the issue, even if she disagrees with them. In addition to Miranda, Harrison has twin six-year old boys who both have autism. 'I can know the grief and shock that parents experience when they find out their kid has autism. I get it,' Harrison said. 'But vaccines are not to blame ... autism is a result of Around 16,000 children in Massachusetts are unvaccinated without claiming an exemption — a group that the state describes as 'noncompliant students' in its documents. Many parents in opposition to the bills questioned why the bills were trained just on the 2,000 students who did have religious exemptions. 'I'm curious why the Legislature is targeting the small percentage of children with religious exemptions and ignoring the huge gap population,' said Ottaviano testifying at the hearing. Advocates for the bills said the new provisions that mandate that all schools must report vaccination numbers to the state's department of public health would address these noncompliant students as well. 'That's what the data reporting is about, we want to make sure that schools have accurate records,' Blair of Massachusetts Families for Vaccines said. 'If there is a gap … they should reach out to those students to find out why the records are not on file.' Speakers in favor of the bills were focused on eliminating religious exemptions in order to protect children who cannot be vaccinated due to medical reasons like allergies or problems with their immune systems. 'It's actually those people … that we're really doing this for, because they're the ones who depend on herd immunity,' Blair said. Advertisement Angela Mathew can be reached at
New York Post
a day ago
- New York Post
Michael Goodwin: Hochul's snubbing of Mamdani will only help boost Cuomo's campaign
The observation that politics often makes for strange bedfellows is now offering an extra-strange New York example. It features an unlikely gift from Gov. Hochul to her predecessor and perpetual tormentor, Andrew Cuomo. Although she was his running mate and Lt. Governor for two terms, they were barely speaking by the time Cuomo was forced out of Albany nearly four years ago. Advertisement To this day, their mutual loathing is palpable. So how then to explain that Hochul threw Cuomo a huge last-minute lifeline in his race for mayor? To be sure, an obvious reason is to help herself in her re-election quest next year. But the immediate impact is a boost for Cuomo in his bid for City Hall. Advertisement You would assume the last thing she wants is to see him sitting in City Hall next year, badgering her and settling scores when she's running for re-election. Yet that could be the result of her move. Here's the scenario: Cuomo is in a tightening race to be the Democrats' nominee, with Election Day this Tuesday. 'Affordability crisis' He leads in the polls but his chief rival, Queens Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani, has been gaining and the early-voting turnout has surged among young people, the core of Mamdani's hard-left base. Moreover, with the city using the ranked-choice voting system, Mamdani has an extra advantage and could ultimately get the votes of four additional lefty candidates in the race through a series of cross endorsements. Advertisement Hochul's shocking help to Cuomo came in response to a question about Mamdani's radical economic platform, which consists of a bunch of free giveaways —buses, child care, etc. All of it would be funded by imposing even higher income taxes on the top 1 percent of New York City residents and hiking the corporate tax. It's part of the progressive playbook he's been selling for months, and his climb in the polls has encouraged other candidates to promote their own expensive wish lists and tax proposals. Advertisement Hochul has been silent all along, but suddenly, and very late in the game, she decided to throw cold water on the proposals that are the heart of Mamdani's eat-the-rich campaign. Asked in a TV interview if she backed his tax plans, the Democratic governor flatly replied, 'No.' 'I'm not raising taxes at a time where affordability is the big issue,' she said. 'I don't want to lose any more people to Palm Beach. We've lost enough . . . so let's be smart about this.' Whoa, Nellie. Hochul's answer was clearly prepared in advance, with her adopting Mamdani's theme of an 'affordability crisis' and turning it on its head to use it as a reason not to implement his agenda. In doing so, she effectively kills his proposals because he would need her and the Democratic-controlled Legislature's approval to put his taxes into law. Get opinions and commentary from our columnists Subscribe to our daily Post Opinion newsletter! Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters And given the timing, her answer could be intended to blunt his late surge by signaling to his supporters his ideas are dead on arrival in Albany. Advertisement Her answer also reveals the outline of Hochul's 2026 campaign. She's effectively taken tax hikes off the table, and if she were to flip-flop next year, she'd be toast. So her answer on Mamdani is as much about her own campaign as his. Dems 'alarmed' Besides, as troubling as Cuomo would be in City Hall, even worse would be the charismatic 33-year-old Mamdani, pushing her and the Legislature even further left. There's also the added baggage of his long trail of antisemitism at a time when Israel is fighting for its survival on several fronts and Dems already are home to Jew-hating Reps Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib. Having Mamdani, a Muslim, as the mayor of the city with the world's largest Jewish population has some top Dems worried that his election would further damage the party's troubled brand. Advertisement Politico reports that Third Way, a center-left Dem think tank, is 'alarmed' by how Mamdani's positions on Israel and other issues, past and present, would be a feast for Republicans in New York and nationally. The outlet cites a Third Way memo that describes 'defunding the police, closing jails, banning private healthcare and operating city-owned grocery stores as positions American voters would find beyond the pale.' They got that right. Advertisement At the same time, it's worth noting that Hochul's rejection of new taxes also amounts to a reversal of her tenure so far. Although she's lately been prattling about 'putting money in people's pockets,' the happy talk follows years of hikes in fees and taxes on New Yorkers to feed the budget beast she's created. As the cost of living in New York continues to soar, she's responsible for policies that have been driving a record number of New Yorkers out of the city and state, including to Palm Beach, Fla. Recall that during her tight race against GOP nominee Lee Zeldin in 2022, Hochul at one point demanded that he and other Republicans 'Just jump on a bus and head down to Florida where you belong, OK?,' before adding: 'You are not New Yorkers.' Advertisement The fact that the GOP is toothless in both Albany and City Hall has allowed her party to continually jack up the outrageously high costs of government and be tougher on cops than on criminals. Hochul's role in the disaster are certain to be the centerpiece of the GOP campaign against her next year, especially with New York moving rightward. In the 2024 election, the Empire State had the biggest swing of any blue state toward President Trump, who carried 43 percent of the vote, against just 37 percent in 2020. Vulnerable Hochul has made herself vulnerable with her implementation of congestion pricing, along with other taxes that are examples of her own drunken-sailor budgeting. The fact that several tax measures were designed to fund the always-broke MTA is no excuse because she controls the agency and has done zero to reform its wasteful ways. Her only answer has been to throw more money at it. Still, her response to Mamdani suggests she belatedly realizes there is validity and votes in the argument that the city and state have reached a tax-and-spend breaking point. As I noted recently, just 6,000 wealthy families in a city of 8.5 million people pay 48 percent of Gotham's personal income tax, which raises about $16 billion a year. These families are the geese who lay the golden eggs for both City Hall and Albany, and with the quality of life declining as the cost of living soars, the last thing the politicians should be doing is giving people new reasons to leave. In Hochul's case, it's relatively easy for her to say no to Mamdani, whose plans definitely would make the problems worse. The real test is whether she has any ideas that could stop the exodus already happening on her watch.
