North Dakota Statehood: A Quirky Constitutional Oversight

North Dakota. That wonderful state that is well known for … well… for being somewhere north of South Dakota. It’s also known for… Hmmm… Come to think of it, we’re not even sure it’s a real place. Have you ever been there? Our 7th grade science teacher claimed to be from North Dakota, but he also thought bubble gum stayed in your stomach for years if you swallowed it, so he was probably wrong about his place of birth, too.

There have been enough references to this seemingly mythical land that we have to think that it is real (although we are still persuaded that Finland is a totally made up place). Admitting that it is a place is not the same as admitting that North Dakota is a real state. Because it wasn’t — at least not until 2012, if some experts are to be believed.

That’s right. Our friends in the north (of South Dakota) spent 123 years in a constitutional gray area, and the story of how that happened is part of American quirky history, with just enough drama to keep it interesting.

A Tiny Technicality, a Big Question

Let’s start with a little light reading: Article VI of the U.S. Constitution. It’s the part that says every state government must require its officials—legislative, judicial, and executive—to take an oath to support the U.S. Constitution. Seems straightforward, right? Well, apparently not if you’re on the drafting committee of the 1889 North Dakota constitution.

When North Dakota became a state under the Enabling Act of 1889, Congress laid out some pretty clear rules. Rule one: make a state constitution. Rule two: don’t let your constitution be “repugnant to the Constitution of the United States.” Yes, that’s the actual legal phrasing. Rule three: enjoy being a state.

North Dakota seemingly nailed all three steps of this process. They drafted a constitution, set up a state government, and celebrated statehood with the gusto you’d expect from a region known for cold winters and stoic personalities. There was just one tiny oversight: the North Dakota constitution forgot to require executive officers, like the governor, to take that all-important oath of allegiance to the U.S. Constitution. Oops.

The Man Who Found the Flaw

Enter John Rolczynski, a North Dakota historian with an eagle eye for detail and, apparently, a lot of free time. In 1995, Rolczynski discovered that the omission in North Dakota’s constitution meant it technically violated Article VI of the U.S. Constitution.

Potentially, that meant the state’s constitution was “repugnant” to the U.S. Constitution. Admittedly, the word “repugnant” was undefined. To our mind, Great-Aunt Lucinda’s mealtime practice of regaling the family with stories of her bowel obstructions is the very definition of “repugnant.” For constitutional lawyers, it seems to mean something else. Rolczynski said that an argument could be be made—if you squint really hard—that North Dakota never actually became a legitimate state.

This revelation didn’t send shockwaves across the nation. Congress didn’t call an emergency session. The Supreme Court didn’t weigh in. Honestly, most people in North Dakota probably didn’t even notice. After all, it wasn’t the first time someone forgot to officially bring a state into the Union. Yes, Ohio, we’re talking about you. For Rolczynski, howver, it was a very big deal, and he spent the next 17 years campaigning to fix it.

A Constitutional Fix

By 2011, Rolczynski’s persistence finally paid off. State Senator Tim Mathern introduced an amendment to the North Dakota constitution to require executive officers to take an oath of office, just like Article VI says they should. The amendment sailed through the legislature, and in 2012, it went to a public vote.

North Dakotans overwhelmingly approved the amendment, with 88.74% voting yes. The other 11.26% presumably voted no just to keep things interesting or to crush Rolczynski’s dreams. We’re still digging into the polling data for the answer to that question.

Was North Dakota Ever Really in Danger?

Now, let’s address the elephant in the room—or the bison, since we’re in North Dakota. Was the state ever actually at risk of being declared illegitimate? Constitutional experts say no.

Here’s why: Article IV of the U.S. Constitution gives Congress the power to admit new states. North Dakota became a state because Congress said so, and once Congress grants statehood, it’s a done deal. Plus, the Enabling Act of 1889 already recognized North Dakota as a state. Even if its constitution didn’t meet every technical requirement, the federal government had already accepted it. In short, North Dakota wasn’t going to lose its star on the flag over a missing oath clause.

But let’s be honest—technicalities have a way of causing headaches. And in a world where people sue over spilled coffee being “too hot,” it’s not entirely implausible to imagine someone trying to exploit this loophole. Thanks to John Rolczynski, they can’t.

Lessons Learned (or Not)

What’s the moral of the story? First, if you have too much time on your hands, maybe take a closer look at your state constitution. You might find a century-old mistake and make a name for yourself in local history. Second, when it comes to legal documents, details matter. One missing clause is all it took to give North Dakota a brief identity crisis—and a funny anecdote for the history books.

And finally, let’s not forget to give North Dakota the respect it deserves. It’s more than just a sparsely populated “hat” for South Dakota. It’s a state that overcame constitutional adversity, fixed its flaws, and now proudly takes its place among the other 49 states we all occasionally ignore. Well done, North Dakota. Well done.

With this quirky little episode now resolved, we can rest easy knowing that North Dakota’s statehood is no longer in question. And just like before, we can go back to giving it exactly the amount of attention it’s always gotten: not much.

---