North Dakota Religious Freedom Amendment, Measure 3 (June 2012)

Religious Freedom Amendment
Type	Constitutional amendment
Origin	citizens
Topic	Religion
Status	Defeated d

The North Dakota Religious Freedom Amendment was on the June 12, 2012 ballot in North Dakota as an initiated constitutional amendment where it was defeated.

According to the proposed initiative, a person's right to act or refuse due to a religious belief may not be burdened by the government unless the government proves it has a "compelling interest" in regulating behavior. The measure is sponsored by the Religious Liberty Restoration Amendment Committee.

Election results

The following are official election results:

Measure 3
Result		Votes	Percentage
d No		107,831	64.02%
Yes		60,611	35.98%

426 of 426 precincts reporting

Results via the North Dakota Board of Elections.

Text of measure

The measure as it appeared on the ballot read:

This initiated constitutional measure would add a new section to Article I of the North Dakota Constitution stating, "Government may not burden a person’s or religious organization’s religious liberty. The right to act or refuse to act in a manner motivated by a sincerely held religious belief may not be burdened unless the government proves it has a compelling governmental interest in infringing the specific act or refusal to act and has used the least restrictive means to further that interest. A burden includes indirect burdens such as withholding benefits, assessing penalties, or an exclusion from programs or access to facilities."

YES – means you approve the measure as stated above.

NO – means you reject the measure as stated above.

Constitutional changes

The proposed measure would have added a new section to Article I of the North Dakota Constitution. The proposed section reads as follows:

Government may not burden a person's or religious organization's religious liberty. The right to act or refuse to act in a manner motivated by a sincerely held religious belief may not be burdened unless the government proves it has a compelling governmental interest in infringing the specific act or refusal to act and has used the least restrictive means to further that interest. A burden includes indirect burdens such as withholding benefits, assessing penalties, or an exclusion from programs or access to facilities.

Support

Supporters

• North Dakota Family Alliance
• North Dakota Catholic Conference

Arguments

• According to the North Dakota Family Alliance website: "Measure 3 restores and preserves a person’s or organization’s religious liberty for our children and grandchildren, while respecting legitimate government interests as provided by our Founding Fathers."
• Tom Freier of the North Dakota Family Alliance stated, "To a great degree, that's really a measure of the people in government, whether it's in local government or state government, that they are discriminating against people of faith because of their religiously held beliefs. And this is an opportunity for the people of North Dakota to vote on a measure to protect those rights given to us in the First Amendment."
• The Religious Liberty Restoration Amendment Committee's website says the amendment would have restored standards for when the government could make mandates counter to individuals' religious beliefs that existed before the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Employment Division v. Smith. According to the committee, the ruling allowed religious exercises to be protected by the First Amendment only when laws or regulations specifically targeted religion.

Campaign contributions

The following information was obtained from North Dakota Secretary of State website.

PAC info:

Donor	Amount raised
ND Family Alliance	$10,001
Total	$10,001

Opposition

Opponents

• North Dakotans Against Measure Three
• North Dakota Women’s Network
• Former Governor George Sinner
• North Dakota Students Voting NO on 3

Arguments

• North Dakotans Against Measure Three was the main group against the measure. According to the campaign website, "Measure 3 is so poorly written and confusing that it can open the door to endless litigation and legal wrangling, clogging our already crowded courts and costing taxpayers more of their hard-earned money. We are all entitled to our own religious beliefs, but that doesn’t give anyone the right to harm other people."

• Other arguments that were made against the measure include that freedom of religion is already a fundamental right in the United States; broad ballot language could lead to a rise in domestic violence because a person could claim that the country's laws don’t apply because some religions allow the discipline of wives and children as seen fit; certain religions could allow for polygamy, which could occur if the measure is passed due to the "misleading language."

• Former Governor George Sinner came out against the measure and argued that there was no need for it and that it would actually take rights away from people. In an interview with KVRR, Sinner said, "Every individual has the right to his or her own choices and this will put the rights under control of a couple bishops."

• The North Dakota Women’s Network passed a resolution in opposition to the measure. In a letter to the Bismark Tribune, co-chairwomen of the group, JoNell Bakke and Melissa Gillett, wrote, "The truth is, Measure 3 could lead to endless litigation and serious, even harmful, consequences for North Dakotans."
• The group North Dakotans Against Measure Three argues on their website that "If Measure 3 passes, it could allow a person to take advantage and use personal religious beliefs to claim the right to break important laws that are meant to protect all of us, like laws against child abuse, domestic violence and non-discrimination. This law could be manipulated and harm others."

Campaign contributions

The following information was obtained from North Dakota Secretary of State website.

PAC info:

PAC	Amount raised
North Dakota Students Voting NO on 3	$5,785.85
North Dakotans Against Measure Three	$427,126.55
Total	$432,912.40

Media editorial positions

See also: Endorsements of North Dakota ballot measures, 2012

Opposition

• In an editorial published on June 8, 2012, the Minot Daily News encouraged voters to turn down the measure saying it could lead to "increased litigation and conflict when claims of religious freedom run afoul of secular laws." The paper also criticized the measure's language and make the claim that the amendment is redundant saying, "We believe the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment and North Dakota's Constitution already adequately guarantee our religious freedom, making Measure 3 an unnecessary change to the state's most prized document."

Path to the ballot

See also: North Dakota signature requirements

2010 effort

Amendment supporters were required to collect a minimum of 25,688 valid signatures by August 4, 2010 in order to place the measure on the 2010 ballot. However, as of the state's August petition drive deadline, supporters had only collected an estimated 22,000 signatures, falling short of the requirement.

2012 effort

Since the petition was valid for one year, petition organizers had until May 2, 2011, to submit signatures for the 2012 ballot. According to census numbers at the time, the measure required a minimum of 26,904 valid signatures in order to qualify for the 2012 ballot.

According to reports, in mid-April 2011 supporters submitted an estimated 30,000 petition signatures, exceeding the minimum requirement. Secretary of State Al Jaeger had until May 25, 2011, to verify the signatures.

On May 25 Jaeger announced that supporters collected more than 28,000 valid signatures thus qualifying the proposed measure for the statewide ballot.

Timeline

The following is a timeline of events surrounding the measure:

Event	Date	Developments
Deadline	Aug. 4 2010	Supporters miss filing deadline for the 2010 ballot.
Signature filing	Mid-Apr. 2011	Signatures were submitted by supporters to the secretary of state.
Signature verification	May 25, 2011	North Dakota Secretary of State Al Jaeger confirmed that supporters collected sufficient signatures.

See also

• 2012 ballot measures
• North Dakota 2012 ballot measures

Articles

• Petition signatures submitted for North Dakota religious freedom measure

External links

• Initiative text
• Initiative timeline

Support

• Yes on Measure 3 campaign site
• North Dakota Family Alliance website

Opposition

• North Dakotans Against Measure Three campaign website

Additional reading

• The Forum of Fargo-Moorhead, "Church and state entangled again," June 6, 2011 (dead link)