Court Strikes ND Beef Board Process
Court Finds North Dakota Beef Board Nomination Process Unconstitutional
LINCOLN, Neb. (DTN) -- Ruling that state law improperly granted special privileges to four private agricultural groups, a North Dakota district judge on Monday struck down the process used to nominate six of nine members of the North Dakota Beef Commission while preserving the state's beef checkoff program.
The District Court for the South Central Judicial District in Burleigh County, North Dakota, struck down language in the law requiring appointments from nominees submitted by the North Dakota Stockmen's Association, North Dakota Stockmen's Association Feeder Council, Milk Producers Association of North Dakota and the North Dakota Livestock Marketing Association.
The court's ruling removes what critics argue is a gatekeeping system controlled by a handful of commodity groups and essentially opens a more direct path for producers to be considered for commission seats. The commission board promotes beef demand and manages the state's checkoff system.
"Section 4.1-03-02(2), N.D.C.C., (state law) deals out an advantage by name," District Judge Jackson J. Lofgren said in his judgment.
"It grants four named associations the exclusive power to choose who may be considered for six seats on a public commission that spends public money."
North Dakota ranchers Kenneth Graner, Jeremy Maher and Michael Heaton, who are directors of the Ranchers Rights Initiative, filed a lawsuit on July 17, 2025, claiming the process violated the state's constitution.
Judge Lofgren pointed to a North Dakota Supreme Court decision from the 1800s that warned against favoritism.
P[L1] D[0x0] M[300x250] OOP[F] ADUNIT[] T[]
"There is no natural reason for a classification of counties in which the same conditions exist, based solely and arbitrarily upon the period of time before or after which such conditions existed for the first time," he wrote in the judgment.
"Such a doctrine would lead inevitably to unlimited special legislation under the mere guise of classification. It would nullify the constitution so far as it prohibited special legislation."
The plaintiffs, however, did not win on every challenge brought to court.
The district court upheld the requirement that commission members must be "participating producers," which means they have not received a refund of state beef checkoff assessments during the previous three years, according to the judgment.
In addition, the court stopped short of abolishing the beef commission or invalidating the beef checkoff program. The court essentially removed the membership language from the law.
As a result, the state's governor may appoint commission members directly, according to the court. The governor will be allowed to accept recommendations for nominations to the board, including the organizations named in the lawsuit.
The nomination process was found unconstitutional mainly because the law created what the court called a "closed class" by naming specific organizations in statute. The state's legislature essentially gave permanent privileges to just the groups named in the statute.
"It is unreasonable for the legislature to name the entities instead of setting criteria for eligible entities to meet," the court said in its ruling.
"The same provisions grant the named associations a privilege no other group can obtain on the same terms. This violates Article I, Section 21."
North Dakota's beef checkoff collects $2 per head of cattle sold in the state and retains $1.50 for state beef promotion, funds research, education and marketing programs.
Cattle producers who seek refunds of their state checkoff assessments will remain ineligible to serve on the commission for three years after receiving refunds.
"It is rationally related to the legislature's interest in having members who fund the program decide how to spend it," the court said in its judgment.
The state of North Dakota argued during the case that a ruling against the state's law could affect the structure of more than 20 other state boards and commissions that use a similar appointment system, although the court did not weigh in on that issue.
Todd Neeley can be reached at todd.neeley@dtn.com.
Follow him on social platform X @DTNeeley
(c) Copyright 2026 DTN, LLC. All rights reserved.