By Robbie Sequeira, Stateline.org

When North Dakota state Sen. Ryan Braunberger first introduced a slate of tenant protection bills this year, he knew the odds of passage weren’t in his favor. Braunberger, a Democratic lawmaker in a Republican-controlled legislature who represents a renter-heavy district in Fargo, spent years as a housing advocate — walking tenants through eviction court, helping them navigate late fees and lease violations.

But inside the statehouse, he was an outlier: one of the only legislators who rents his home.

By the end of the legislative session, just one of his five proposals passed. But that one might prove to be a major overhaul of the state’s eviction process.

The bill came together thanks to an unlikely lawmaking alliance: a renter and housing advocate with deep policy knowledge, and a Republican who hadn’t previously focused on eviction law but quickly saw its impact in his district.

Co-sponsored by Republican state Sen. Jeff Barta, the legislation allows tenants to petition to have eviction records sealed after seven years, if they’ve resolved any outstanding rent or damages and stayed eviction-free during that time.

“I didn’t know much about this process, but when Sen. Braunberger reached out to me, I looked into just how much an eviction from years ago was possibly affecting renters and constituents in my district,” said Barta. “As a new lawmaker, you’re still getting settled in, so it was good to dive into an issue that hits home to my district.”

Nationally, North Dakota has joined a slow but steady stream of states that seal or expunge eviction records.

Eviction filings are public and often lack case outcomes or context, yet they’re widely used by screening companies, creating barriers even when tenants win or cases are dismissed. A 2020 study of 3.6 million eviction records across a dozen states by Princeton University’s Eviction Lab found that 22% of the records were ambiguous or falsely represented a tenant’s past.

Black women, especially those with children, are disproportionately affected by evictions. Young children and infants are affected more than any other age group.

Barta noted that many North Dakotans are evicted for financial reasons or may be fleeing domestic violence, and that holding old evictions against tenants prevents them from rebuilding stability.

“That’s really what caught my eye,” Barta said. “I need to be aware of what my constituents are facing. Some people weren’t evicted for being irresponsible. They were fleeing violence or hit by one bad break.”

Grand Forks, which is in Barta’s district, is more than 50% renter-occupied, making it one of the most tenant-heavy in the state, thanks in part to its proximity to the University of North Dakota. Grand Forks has also seen rents climb and vacancy rates tighten, while evictions — sometimes stemming from as little as a few hundred dollars of unpaid rent — can leave permanent marks on a tenant’s record.

“Most landlords wouldn’t even give people a second chance once they saw an eviction on someone’s record,” Braunberger said. “It didn’t matter if the case was from a decade ago or if it had been resolved. That record stuck to them like glue.”

The North Dakota Apartment Association opposed the measure, citing concerns that it could allow sealing of eviction records even when the eviction stemmed from issues beyond domestic violence, such as nonpayment or other lease violations. Lobbyist Jeremy Petron testified that the bill could undermine property managers’ ability to assess tenant risk through background checks.

“Property owners and property managers rely on background checks for decisions on prospective tenant approvals for the safety of neighbors and the property, and the business investment risk,” Petron testified.

Compromises

Passage of North Dakota’s law required not only bipartisanship but also key compromises outside the legislature. Early drafts proposed full expungement, a term that drew sharp criticism from the North Dakota judiciary, which warned the language implied a permanent erasure of legal history without proper oversight.

In response, lawmakers worked with the state Supreme Court and housing groups to shift toward sealing records instead, a more limited measure than expungement.

Most states tend to seal records rather than expunge them.

North Dakota’s Administrative Rule 41, which governs access to court records, is now being updated to reflect the new law. Sealed eviction records will be categorized as confidential, but they won’t be deleted outright. And not all evictions will qualify: Tenants must have no further evictions within seven years, and must resolve any unpaid rent or damages related to the original filing.

“After talking with the Supreme Court and apartment associations, we landed on a compromise: sealing,” Braunberger said. “It preserves judicial records while still giving tenants a fair shot at moving on.”

Sara Behrens, a staff attorney with the State Court Administrator’s Office, said the final version addressed the court’s concerns.

“Without these amendments, any eviction could be sealed following seven years regardless of further evictions or outstanding judgments,” she said. “That was a serious flaw we were able to correct.”

Despite North Dakota’s Republican supermajority, the legislation passed with overwhelming support: 35-12 in the Senate and 88-5 in the House. Both Barta and Braunberger attributed the success to North Dakota’s relatively open political culture.

“Even though we have a supermajority, there’s not a ton of separation,” Barta said. “We talk. We listen.”

Braunberger echoed that sentiment. “If I want any policy to move, I have to collaborate,” he said. “That’s almost a given here.”

Yet the sealing law was only a partial win in a broader tenant rights agenda for Braunberger. Three other bills — ranging from caps landlords can impose on late rent fees to investigations into tenant-landlord matters — died in committee or failed to gain traction. Braunberger said he plans to reintroduce some of them next session.

“It’s a civil matter, so people don’t have a right to counsel,” Braunberger said of tenant legal proceedings. “That’s something I’d love to change. No one should lose their home without legal help.”

Both lawmakers pointed to next steps beyond legislation. Barta emphasized the need for better communication and education to help tenants understand leases, rights and processes. Braunberger wants more incentives for mediation, saying it can reduce financial losses for both landlords and renters and keep disputes out of court.

Elsewhere

Last year, Idaho, Maryland and Massachusetts enacted laws to seal certain eviction records from public scrutiny and from tenant screening companies. Massachusetts’ law just went into effect in May, while Maryland’s law is scheduled for October.

In Indiana, a new law allows courts to seal eviction filings automatically in three circumstances: dismissal of the case, judgment in favor of a tenant or reversal on appeal. The automatic sealing reduces the burden on tenants to petition on their own.

Hawaii, Kansas, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania and South Carolina are among states that introduced eviction-sealing laws this year. Those bills, which still await passage in both legislative chambers, vary on the conditions of sealing.

This June, Nevada Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo vetoed two high-profile tenant protection bills. One would have automatically sealed certain eviction records, and another sought to slow the state’s fast-track summary eviction process.

In his veto of the eviction sealing bill, Lombardo said it was “lopsided, red-tape laden, and would have disastrous consequences on Nevada’s housing market.”

He argued the bill would overburden courts, eliminate judicial discretion and “risks punishing” property owners by shifting procedural responsibilities onto them.

Pennsylvania’s proposal, which would keep fault-based eviction records public for seven years, would limit access to records of no-fault evictions, in which a landlord asks a tenant to move out for reasons such as wanting occupancy or to sell the property. It passed the House by 105-98, thanks to a few Republican votes.

Kansas’ proposal would offer automatic expungement after two years unless debts remain, and South Carolina’s bill would seal all eviction records in circumstances in which an eviction case is filed but doesn’t lead to an actual eviction order within 30 days, or six years after a case was closed.

North Dakota’s bipartisan success with its new sealing law positions the state as one with lawmakers finding common ground on housing problems.

“We have a housing crisis,” Braunberger said. “Some areas can’t even attract employers because there’s no place for workers to live. Until we fix that, housing policy isn’t just social policy, it’s economic policy.”

Stateline reporter Robbie Sequeira can be reached at rsequeira@stateline.org.

©2025 States Newsroom. Visit at stateline.org. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.