AI Laws in North Dakota (ND)
No state AI law. Energy sector AI use monitored.
What companies in North Dakota need to know about AI compliance
As of 2026-04-22, North Dakota has not enacted an AI-specific statute; the North Dakota Attorney General office defers to no comprehensive privacy statute; UDAP coverage via N.D.C.C. sec. 51-15-02. Operators across sectors in North Dakota watch federal signals first.
North Dakota's non-legislation on AI means the North Dakota Attorney General office has discretion to apply no comprehensive privacy statute to AI-driven consumer harms as they arise.
The federal and neighboring-state framework that governs your AI operations. Cross-Sector operators in North Dakota operate under a federal-dominant framework anchored by FTC Section 5 (15 USC 45) and NIST AI RMF 1.0, with adjacent authorities Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) / NIST Cybersecurity Framework (15 U.S.C. § 6801-6809; NIST CSF 2.0); General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) (for EU users) (EU Regulation 2016/679); Section 508 / ADA Title III (Digital Accessibility) (29 U.S.C. § 794(d); 42 U.S.C. § 12181). FTC Operation AI Comply (Sep 2024) targeted five companies across sectors. The practical risk they have to price in is cross-sector FTC Section 5 exposure and state UDAP liability, and the bellwether signal to monitor is NIST AI RMF 1.0 (Jan 2023) is cited as the federal baseline across 30+ agency guidance documents. Minnesota -- Minnesota Consumer Data Privacy Act (Minn. Stat. ch. 325M) — automated-decision / profiling opt-out sets the de-facto regional floor. North Dakota enacted HB 1361 (2025) clarifying that "person" in state code does not include artificial intelligence, but has adopted no comprehensive AI regulation. Use this as a starting point; sector pages on this site go deeper into industry-specific obligations.
Federal law still governs Cross-Sector AI in North Dakota primarily through FTC Section 5 (15 USC 45) and NIST AI RMF 1.0. Adjacent federal authorities include Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) / NIST Cybersecurity Framework (15 U.S.C. § 6801-6809; NIST CSF 2.0); General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) (for EU users) (EU Regulation 2016/679); Section 508 / ADA Title III (Digital Accessibility) (29 U.S.C. § 794(d); 42 U.S.C. § 12181). Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) / NIST Cybersecurity Framework (enforced by Federal Trade Commission; NIST) applies to saas platforms handling personal/financial data via ai must implement nist csf security standards: identify, protect, detect, respond, recover. Penalty exposure: ftc civil penalties up to $100,000/violation; private litigation for data breaches. FTC Operation AI Comply (Sep 2024) targeted five companies across sectors.
Two neighboring states shape regional expectations: Minnesota's Minnesota Consumer Data Privacy Act (Minn. Stat. ch. 325M) — automated-decision / profiling opt-out (penalty Up to $7,500 per violation, deadline In effect since July 31, 2025) and Montana's Consumer Data Privacy Act (AI provisions) (penalty Up to $7,500 per violation). Any North Dakota-headquartered operator touching those markets inherits the stricter of the two.
The enforcement surface for Cross-Sector centres on FTC, CFPB, State Attorneys General, and the statute operators most often under-document is General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) (for EU users) (EU Regulation 2016/679) — a gap that surfaces in cross-sector FTC Section 5 exposure disputes. Build an evidence binder covering AI inventory, risk-tier register, incident-response runbook, and board-level AI risk report. Treat NIST AI RMF 1.0 (Jan 2023) is cited as the federal baseline across 30+ agency guidance documents as your leading indicator and escalate when the signal shifts.
With 11-50 employees you can justify a half-time compliance lead and part-time external counsel on retainer. Small-stage Cross-Sector operators should deploy a named compliance lead, formal AI inventory, quarterly bias spot-checks, and a documented escalation path, with semi-annual internal audit with annual external review and ownership resting with a designated AI compliance lead reporting to the CEO. small-business budgets ($50K-$250K) justify a compliance lead plus a GRC tool such as Credo AI, Fairly, or Holistic AI. For Cross-Sector specifically, the sharpest exposure to manage is cross-sector FTC Section 5 exposure and state UDAP liability. Given North Dakota's concentration in energy, agriculture, and government services, oilfield optimization AI and agricultural supply-chain algorithms deserve priority in your AI inventory.
Verified 2026-04-22. See https://www.legis.nd.gov/ for the North Dakota Attorney General public record on North Dakota AI policy.
No state AI law — but this federal framework still applies in North Dakota
North Dakota has not enacted its own AI-specific statute. That does not mean AI is unregulated here: the U.S. federal framework below is in force in North Dakota exactly as it is in every other state. Each authority links to its official government source. This is the cross-sector baseline — see the federal AI tracker for bills moving through Congress, and the industry pages below for sector-specific obligations.
Prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce. AI-generated marketing content that deceives consumers — synthetic testimonials, undisclosed AI-created imagery, deceptive personalization, dark patterns amplified by AI — is actionable under Section 5.
Applies the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures four-fifths rule to AI hiring tools. Employer is liable for discriminatory AI outputs even when the tool is built and operated by a third-party vendor.
AI hiring and performance monitoring systems must accommodate individuals with disabilities. Must not eliminate essential job functions or require unnecessary testing.
AI credit and background check systems used in rental decisions must be transparent and non-discriminatory.
Voluntary framework organizing AI risk into Govern, Map, Measure, and Manage functions. A manufacturing-focused profile is under development. Framework is referenced in federal-contractor expectations and in agency best-practice guidance.
Recent AI law developments in North Dakota
Updated July 11, 2026Recent news coverage of AI regulation and policy in North Dakota. Headlines are aggregated automatically; follow each link for the full story.
Coverage from The Bismarck Tribune on AI legislation and regulation relevant to North Dakota.
Coverage from North Dakota Monitor on AI legislation and regulation relevant to North Dakota.
Coverage from Valley News Live on AI legislation and regulation relevant to North Dakota.
AI bills moving through the North Dakota legislature
Updated July 12, 2026AI-related bills currently tracked in the North Dakota legislature, updated automatically from Open States and the state legislature's own official record. Follow each link for the official bill text, sponsors, and status history.
AN ACT to create and enact a new section to chapter 16.1-10 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to artificial intelligence disclosure statements.
Governor signed
A BILL for an Act to create and enact a new section to chapter 12.1-31 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to prohibiting deepfake videos and images; and to provide a penalty.
Failed in House
Applicable laws
North Dakota AI compliance by industry
AI compliance by company size
Jump to top-risk sectors for your company size
Quick resources for North Dakota
Industry risk levels in North Dakota
Do you also serve EU customers?
The EU AI Act applies to any company serving EU customers, even if you're based in North Dakota. Penalties reach €35M or 7% of global revenue. Deadline: August 2, 2026.
Other states with active AI laws
Related resources
Anchored to the primary government source (statute, bill text, or agency rule) and verified directly against it · Last verified Apr 22, 2026. See our methodology.
- ↗legis.nd.govhttps://www.legis.nd.gov/