House committee hears competing views on school chaplains bill; ACLU and education groups warn of constitutional risks

Representative Mike Olsen presented House Bill 1456, which would authorize school districts to use certified chaplains — employed or volunteer — and establish a pilot program. Olsen and multiple witnesses argued chaplains provide nonclinical spiritual and pastoral support, augment existing mental‑health services, and reduce teacher stress.

Supporters described chaplain certification, crisis response training, and partnerships that operate in other states. Johnny Davis of the National School Chaplain Association described certification requirements his group uses: background checks (including social media screening), ecclesiastical endorsement, 2,000 hours of ministerial service, 80 hours of coursework, and safety certifications (active shooter, stop‑the‑bleed, behavioral threat assessment). Chaplains and local pastors told the committee they do not proselytize in chaplain roles and described examples of chaplain work with schools, first responders and youth sports teams.

Opposition included the American Civil Liberties Union of North Dakota, the North Dakota School Boards Association, the North Dakota School Counselor Association and other speakers who raised separation‑of‑church‑and‑state concerns and potential litigation risk. The ACLU’s testimony argued that public school students have broad community access to clergy and that hiring or designating chaplains in public schools risks unconstitutional endorsement of religion and could open districts to lawsuits if they accept or reject volunteers on faith‑basis grounds.

"Paid or volunteer chaplains in North Dakota's public schools will undermine this fundamental constitutional principle and make our schools unwelcoming environments for students who may hold different religious beliefs," said Cody Schuler of the ACLU of North Dakota.

Several school‑system witnesses urged the committee that chaplains are already used in crises and can be contracted by local districts under existing law; they questioned whether a change in statute is necessary. Others asked for clearer certification standards, limits on proselytizing and safeguards to ensure chaplains do not supplant licensed, confidential counseling.

Committee members asked about duties, certification standards, whether chaplains promote a single religious view and whether a state statute is needed when districts can already contract for chaplain‑type services locally. Supporters said certification programs and local board oversight would control standards; opponents cited potential for coercion, unclear vetting and the costs of defending litigation.

The hearing record shows a strong, split testimony set: faith‑based organizations and a national chaplain organization pushed for broader statutory authority and a pilot program; the ACLU, school associations and some educators urged caution and recommended local, not statutory, action. The committee closed the hearing with no recorded vote as testimony concluded.