====== N.D. Const. art. XI, § 4 — Research ======

**Oath of Office.** Text of the section: [[.:start|current and prior versions]].

Every citing reference in the corpus: **11** court opinions and **2** Attorney General opinions. Counts include the section's pre-1981 designation (§ 211), era-gated by the renumbering crosswalk.

//Generated from the citation graph of the validated corpus. Treatment groupings (construing / citing / recital) are heuristic reading aids, not editorial judgments — read the opinion before relying on any signal.//

===== Cases by topic =====

//Topics are machine-generated groupings of the citing references — reading aids, not editorial judgments. Documents cited after the last classification pass appear in the lists below until the next pass.//

== Oath requirements for civil officers ==

  * Sanderson v. Demers, et al., [[https://www.ndcourts.gov/supreme-court/opinions/213102|2026 ND 113]] (2026, Tufte, J.)  ·  quotes the provision
    * //¶ 5: “…%%ice. The district court rejected that allegation as a matter of law, concluding he failed to state a claim for which relief can be granted. Sanderson asserts several provisions of state law require Defendants to provide an oath of office: N.D. Const. art. XI, § 4, and N.D.C.C. chs. 44-01, 44-05, 27-05.2, 27-03, and 11-10. The court did not err in determining these provisions do not apply to Defendants as a matter of law. A%%…”//
  * Holkesvig v. State (Consolidated w/20120334), [[https://www.ndcourts.gov/supreme-court/opinions/74188|2013 ND 1]] (2013, per curiam)
  * N.D. Att'y Gen.: [[https://attorneygeneral.nd.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/80-93.pdf|N.D. Op. Att'y Gen. 80-93 (1980)]]
  * N.D. Att'y Gen.: [[https://attorneygeneral.nd.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/66-301.pdf|N.D. Op. Att'y Gen. 66-301 (1966)]]
  * State ex rel. Dreyer v. Brekke, [[https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3934869/state-ex-rel-dreyer-v-brekke/|1947 ND 34]] (1947, Nuessle, J.)
  * State ex rel. Johnson v. Baker, [[https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3933194/state-ex-rel-johnson-v-baker/|1945 ND 14]] (1945, Burke, J.)  ·  quotes the provision
  * State ex rel. Johnson, Atty. Gen. v. Cahill, [[https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/6851423/state-ex-rel-johnson-v-cahill/|1923 ND 37]] (1923, Cooley, J.)

== The oath and the duty to support the constitution ==

  * N.D. Legislative Assembly, et al. v. Burgum, [[https://www.ndcourts.gov/supreme-court/opinions/3123|2018 ND 189]] (2018, Tufte, J.)
  * Schloesser v. Larson, [[https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2074588/schloesser-v-larson/|1990 ND 125]] (1990, Gierke, J.)  ·  quotes the provision
    * //“…%%trary notwithstanding.” U.S. Const. art. VI, cl. 2. Each North Dakota judge takes a constitutional oath: “I do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of North Dakota;....” N.D.Const. art. XI, § 4. In a democracy that safeguards individual rights in a constitution, the judiciary cannot be impotent to rectify private injustices inflicted in the name of public interests. Reversal here would not make the State lia%%…”//
  * State v. First State Bank of Jud, [[https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3933924/state-v-first-state-bank-of-jud/|1924 ND 183]] (1924, Christianson, J.)  ·  quotes the provision
    * //“…%%t to the performance of any official act, each judge is required to take an official oath, whereby he, in the most solemn manner, pledges himself to support the federal and state Constitutions and to faithfully discharge the duties of his office. N. D. Const. § 211. The first duty assumed by each judge under his oath of office is to support the federal and state Constitutions. N. D. Const. § 211; U. S. Const. art. 6. Hence, if in any cause presented to a court, one of the parties%%…”//
  * In re Freerks, [[https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/6847942/in-re-freerks/|1902 ND 24]] (1902, Wallin, J.)  ·  quotes the provision
    * //“…%%ethics of the profession, but it also evinces a degree of moral turpitude in the accused which this court can neither overlook nor condone. Before an attorney can be admitted to practice at the bar in this state, he is required to take the oath prescribed by section 211 of the state constitution, and in doing so he swears that he "will faithfully discharge the duties of the office of" an attorney at law. In this case there can be no question that this oath has been disregarded by the a%%…”//

== Candidate pledges as impermissible additional oaths ==

  * State ex rel. Marshall v. Blaisdell, [[https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/6849991/state-ex-rel-marshall-v-blaisdell/|1910 ND 77]] (1910, Morgan, J.)
  * State ex rel. McCue, Atty. Gen. v. Blaisdell, [[https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/6848650/state-v-blaisdell/|1908 ND 96]] (1908, Fisk, J.)  ·  quotes the provision
    * //“…%%r. To this extent only is the validity of the law challenged. It is urged, first, that the law is invalid and unconstitutional in that it requires of legislative members an additional oath, test, and declaration to that fixed by the Constitution of the state. Section 211. Said section is as follows: "Members of the legislative assembly and judicial [*144] departments, except such inferior officers as may be by law exempted, shall, before they enter on the duties of their respective offi%%…”//

----
//The sidebar keeps a curated digest; this page is the complete record.//