The Senate Judiciary Committee on an unspecified date voted to recommend "do not pass" on Senate Bill 2095, which would have excused law enforcement officers from jury duty in criminal cases. The committee also gave favorable recommendations — some as amended — on several other bills, including measures on public records for sensitive images, the Uniform Child Abduction Prevention Act and uniform electronic estate planning rules.

Why it matters: The committee’s split on SB 2095 reflects competing priorities about courtroom fairness and public-safety staffing. Other votes advance proposals that change how agencies handle sensitive images and modernize estate planning documents, matters that affect law enforcement operations, courts and financial institutions across North Dakota.

What the committee did and why: Senator Michael Larson (sponsor) opened the hearing on SB 2095, saying the bill would add law enforcement officers to the list of people excused from jury service in criminal trials because ‘‘they’re always excused’’ once identified and the time spent waiting to be excused reduces patrol time.

Supporters, including Stephanie Ingebretson representing the Chiefs of Police Association of North Dakota and the North Dakota League of Cities, told the committee the bill would save law‑enforcement resources by keeping officers on patrol instead of waiting to be excused in court. A member of the public, Carol Tooele, said officers view jury calls as a waste of time because they expect to be excused.

Opponents and skeptics warned the committee that carving out another exemption could undermine the jury system’s fairness. Senator Vaughn Merdahl (recorded opposing the bill in committee discussion) described jury service as a ‘‘sacred system’’ and raised concerns that many categories of citizens could plausibly claim hardship. Senator Sara Castaneda and others argued that having a law‑enforcement juror in a criminal case could be material to reaching the correct verdict in some cases.

Outcome on SB 2095: A motion authorizing a "do not pass" recommendation for Senate Bill 2095 carried on a roll-call vote in committee. The recorded votes on the successful "do not pass" recommendation included: Senator Cory — Yes; Senator Brownberger — Yes; Senator Myrtle — Aye; Senator Larson — No; Senator Lueck — No; Senator Castaneda — Aye; Chairman Paulson — No. (Roll-call excerpts provided in committee transcript.)

Other committee actions (at a glance):
- Senate Bill 2083 (sensitive images / open records): An amendment offered by the North Dakota Highway Patrol and negotiated with the Attorney General narrowed and clarified the bill’s scope to define "sensitive image" (exposed intimate parts, gruesome injury, deceased individual, or a minor) and to make the exemption apply more broadly across open-records rules (explicitly including body‑worn camera and scene photographs). The committee recommended a due-pass on the amendment and then a do-pass on the bill as amended.

- Senate Bill 2126 (Uniform Child Abduction Prevention Act): The committee heard testimony from a uniform-law commissioner and the State Bar and gave the bill a due-pass recommendation. Testimony described the measure as a narrowly tailored preventative tool allowing courts to impose travel and contact restrictions when there is a demonstrated risk of abduction.

- Senate Bill 2127 (Uniform Electronic Estate Planning Documents Act): The committee recommended a due-pass. Supporters included the Uniform Law Commission, the North Dakota Bankers Association and the Department of Financial Institutions; witnesses said the act fills a gap in current law and enables electronically executed non‑testamentary estate documents (for example, many powers of attorney and trusts).

- Senate Bill 2077 (state hospital transfers): The committee adopted an amendment to restore a court petition safeguard for transferring or assigning individuals at a treatment facility and recommended the bill as amended by voice/roll call.

What the votes mean next: Bills receiving a due-pass / do-pass recommendation will be listed for possible floor action and further consideration by the full Senate. The do-not-pass recommendation on SB 2095 means that, unless the sponsor successfully moves to override the committee recommendation on the floor, the tribunal will not advance that exemption for law enforcement this session.

Quotes from committee proceedings:
"We want to add to that list being a law enforcement officer… I would rather have their time used for being out doing the job in the community rather than sitting just to wait to be excused," said Senator Larson while introducing SB 2095.

"The jury duty in the whole system is a sacred system," said Senator Merdahl, who opposed the jury‑duty carve‑out.

"Our proposal defines sensitive image... it would encompass body cameras," said Aaron Hummel of the North Dakota Highway Patrol while discussing the amendment to Senate Bill 2083.

Clarifying details and immediate context:
- SB 2095 was limited by the sponsor to criminal trials only, according to sponsor remarks and testimony.
- The SB 2083 amendment uses a working definition of "sensitive image" that includes images of exposed intimate parts, gruesome injury, deceased individuals, or minors and ties the exemption into North Dakota’s open-records statute.
- The Legislature’s committee process leaves bills recommended "do pass" subject to further floor scheduling and debate; a committee "do not pass" recommendation does not by itself kill a bill on the floor but is the committee’s formal advice to the chamber.

Provenance (selected transcript evidence):
- SB 2095 hearing opened at transcript block starting s=371.15 ("We will open the hearing on senate bill 2095…"). Topic discussion closes at s=837.86 ("we will close the hearing on senate bill 2095").
- SB 2083 amendment and vote testimony begins at s=1452.78 with the Highway Patrol presenting and committee roll calls recorded later in the transcript (s=1864.41–s=1938.325).
- SB 2126 testimony begins at s=6889.87 (Judge Gail Haggerty) and the committee voted to advance it at s=7615.9–s=7651.535.

Ending: Committee members split on whether law-enforcement officers should be automatically excused from criminal juries, and the committee’s recommendation reflects that division. Multiple other measures — on public-records exemptions for sensitive images, uniform preventive remedies for child abduction risk, and electronic estate planning documents — were advanced and will proceed to the next steps of the legislative process for further consideration.