Does North Dakota's ban on 'electronic machine-readable code' for vaccination records mean the Department of Health cannot use QR codes for anything?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 2022. Ezel answers yours: what it means for your facts, under current North Dakota law, with citations.
Plain-English summary
In 2021, North Dakota enacted § 23-01-05.3 as part of a wave of state-level "vaccine passport" restrictions following the COVID-19 pandemic. The statute restricts the use of "electronic machine-readable code" in connection with vaccination records. Dr. Nizar Wehbi at the Department of Health asked the AG what that phrase actually covers. The concern was practical: the department uses QR codes routinely for public information (event registrations, downloadable forms, conference posters). Did the statute sweep all of those uses into a categorical ban?
AG Drew Wrigley read the phrase narrowly. The statutory context, he concluded, is vaccination records. "Electronic machine-readable code" in this provision means a QR code that contains or links to vaccination-record information. It does not impose a department-wide ban on QR codes generally. The Department of Health may continue to use QR codes for everyday non-vaccination purposes without violating the statute.
The opinion is a short landing-page summary; the AG's office did not publish a long-form analysis. The take-home is the limiting principle: the statute is about vaccination records, not about machine-readable codes generally.
What this means for you
North Dakota Department of Health staff
The opinion concludes that § 23-01-05.3's restriction on "electronic machine-readable code" is limited to QR codes related to vaccination records. It does not prohibit the Department's everyday uses of QR codes that are unrelated to vaccinations.
State and local public-health agencies generally
The opinion is addressed specifically to the Department of Health, but its statutory-construction holding describes the reach of § 23-01-05.3 as a whole: the phrase ties to vaccination records, not to QR codes generally.
Employers and private actors
The opinion does not opine on what private employers or businesses may or may not require with respect to QR-coded vaccination credentials. It is limited to the Department of Health's question about its own operations.
State legislators
The opinion describes § 23-01-05.3 as narrowed by its surrounding statutory context to vaccination-record QR codes. The opinion does not call for legislative action or suggest amendments.
Common questions
Q: What exactly is § 23-01-05.3?
A: It is part of North Dakota's 2021 response to vaccine passport proposals. The statute restricts certain uses of vaccination-record information, including the issuance of standardized digital codes that represent a person's vaccination status.
Q: Does this apply to private businesses checking vaccination status?
A: The opinion answers only what § 23-01-05.3 means for the Department of Health's own operations. It does not address the statute's reach to private actors.
Q: What if a QR code links to a webpage that has both vaccination and non-vaccination information?
A: The opinion does not address mixed-use links. Its holding is limited to the construction of the phrase "electronic machine-readable code" as applied to the Department's everyday QR uses.
Q: Are North Dakota AG opinions binding?
A: AG opinions in North Dakota are persuasive authority. They guide public officials' actions until a court rules otherwise. A court can disagree, but state employees can rely on the AG's reading in good faith.
Background and statutory framework
The COVID-19 pandemic produced a wave of 2021 state legislation aimed at preventing "vaccine passport" systems. North Dakota's § 23-01-05.3 fits within that wave. The statute was written to prevent the standardization of QR-coded vaccination credentials as a condition of access to services. Read literally, the prohibition on "electronic machine-readable code" could be expanded to all QR uses; the AG's narrower reading aligns it with the statute's apparent target.
The AG's interpretive move tracks ordinary statutory construction: a phrase is read in light of its surrounding context. The surrounding context here is vaccination records. The phrase is given effect in that context; broader applications would be inconsistent with the surrounding text.
The Department of Health's practical concern (will we be in violation if we put a QR code on a conference poster?) is the kind of frequently-asked question the AG opinion process resolves cheaply. The answer here is a useful safe harbor for state-agency communications staff.
Citations
- N.D.C.C. § 23-01-05.3 (limitation on vaccination-record machine-readable code)
Source
Original opinion text
Full opinion text unavailable from the official source. See the linked landing page above for the official summary.
The landing page reports:
Request: What is the meaning of the phrase "electronic machine-readable code" as utilized in N.D.C.C. § 23-01-05.3.
Conclusion: The term "electronic machine-readable code," as utilized in N.D.C.C. § 23-01-05.3, is limited to a QR code related to vaccination records, but does not prohibit the use of QR codes in the normal, everyday activities of the Department.
Get today's answer for your situation
You just read a 2022 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current North Dakota statutes and case law and answers your specific situation, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the law it relies on.