North Dakota does not have a general statute that requires or comprehensively regulates private employer drug testing. There is no dedicated drug free workplace act that spells out notice periods, panel selection, or appeal rights for a private sector program. Instead, employers in the state operate under the general at will employment framework and three narrower pieces of law that matter once testing is in place: the medical marijuana program's employer provisions, the workers compensation definition that excludes intoxicant related injuries, and the unemployment insurance misconduct rule. This guide walks through what the statute text actually says, where North Dakota law is silent, and how federal rules fit in for regulated positions.
North Dakota law can change, and how an agency or court applies these rules to a specific workplace can vary. Confirm current statute text on the state legislature site before relying on it, and talk to counsel before writing or enforcing a testing policy.
No General Private Employer Testing Statute
North Dakota's general employment statutes, collected in N.D.C.C. Title 34, Chapter 34-01, cover contract of employment basics, wage protections, retaliation, and discrimination, but they do not include a provision that authorizes, limits, or sets procedure for private employer drug testing. Because North Dakota is an at will employment state, a private employer generally may adopt pre employment, random, reasonable suspicion, or post accident testing as a condition of employment without a statewide testing statute standing in the way. The absence of a statute also means there is no state created floor for notice, confirmation testing, or a review process, so the terms an employer sets in its own written policy are what actually govern the program on the ground. The workers compensation and unemployment provisions below only reward an employer when a written policy and a confirmed laboratory result are part of the record, so a loosely drafted policy can lose protections that otherwise exist in North Dakota law.
Medical Marijuana and the Workplace
North Dakota voters approved a medical marijuana program, and the implementing law is the Compassionate Care Act at N.D.C.C. Chapter 19-24.1. The employer specific language sits in N.D.C.C. 19-24.1-34, titled "Acts not prohibited, acts not required." That section states plainly that the chapter does not prohibit an employer from disciplining an employee for possessing or consuming usable marijuana in the workplace, working while under the influence of marijuana, or working with marijuana in the employee's system. The same section also confirms the chapter does not require a landlord, health care provider, or insurer to accommodate marijuana use or certification in specific ways unrelated to employment.
Read together, this means North Dakota has not written an employment nondiscrimination protection into its medical marijuana law the way some other states have. A registered qualifying patient's card does not, by the statute's own text, stop an employer from treating a positive test or on the job impairment as a policy violation. Because the statute does not define "under the influence" in drug test terms and does not set a THC cutoff for employment purposes, employers that want to rely on a positive result should route it through confirmation testing and a documented review step rather than treating an immunoassay screen alone as proof of impairment.
Workers Compensation: The Intoxicant Exclusion
North Dakota's workforce safety and insurance law defines what counts as a compensable injury in N.D.C.C. 65-01-02. Within that definition, the statute lists several categories of injury that are excluded from coverage, and one of them is "any injury caused by the use of intoxicants, including recreational marijuana use, or the illegal use of controlled substances." This is an exclusion built into the definition of a compensable injury itself, not a separate rebuttable presumption triggered by a specific test cutoff. The statute text does not list numeric cutoff levels the way some states' workers compensation statutes do, so whether an injury was in fact caused by intoxicant use is a factual question Workforce Safety and Insurance or a reviewing body would resolve on the record of a given claim.
For an employer, the practical point is the same one that runs through every section in this guide: a documented, confirmed test result supports a stronger claim position than a rapid screen alone. Because the exclusion turns on causation, an employer relying on it should be prepared to show that the injury was in fact caused by intoxicant use, not merely that a worker tested positive for a substance at some point. The statute text, including the full list of related exclusions, should be read in full before any claim decision is finalized.
Unemployment Insurance: The General Misconduct Rule
N.D.C.C. 52-06-02 disqualifies an individual from unemployment benefits for the week in which the individual was discharged for misconduct connected with the individual's most recent employment, and for a period afterward until the individual meets an earnings threshold. The statute text itself does not define misconduct with drug specific language, set out a required panel, or describe a refusal to test as a standalone disqualifying event the way some other states' unemployment statutes do. Job Service North Dakota, the state agency that administers unemployment claims, applies the general misconduct standard in section 52-06-02 to the facts of each separation, which can include a failed or refused test taken under an employer's written policy, but the outcome in a specific case depends on that factual record rather than a drug specific statute section.
Because the statute is general rather than drug specific, employers should not assume a positive result automatically disqualifies a former employee from benefits. A written policy that clearly states testing is a condition of employment, that a positive confirmed result or a refusal is treated as a violation, and that employees received notice of the policy before the incident, gives Job Service North Dakota a cleaner record to apply the misconduct standard to.
Cannabis Status in North Dakota
North Dakota has a medical marijuana program under N.D.C.C. Chapter 19-24.1, described above, but voters have not approved an adult use or recreational marijuana law, and marijuana otherwise remains a controlled substance under state law. The medical program does not include an employment nondiscrimination clause, so neither registered patient status nor off duty medical use creates a statutory shield against a positive workplace test or a policy based employment decision under the statute text currently in force. Because cannabis law changes across state lines and the North Dakota legislature can amend this chapter, employers with workers in more than one state should confirm current statute text directly on the state legislature's site rather than relying on a multi state summary, and should generally consult counsel before disciplining an employee based on a positive marijuana result.
| Area | North Dakota rule | Primary source |
|---|---|---|
| Private employer testing | No general statute; governed by employer policy under at will employment | N.D.C.C. Title 34, Chapter 34-01 |
| Medical marijuana and employment | No required accommodation; employer may discipline for workplace possession, impairment, or marijuana in system | N.D.C.C. 19-24.1-34 |
| Workers compensation | Injury caused by intoxicant or illegal controlled substance use is excluded from compensable injury | N.D.C.C. 65-01-02 |
| Unemployment insurance | General misconduct disqualification; not drug specific in the statute text | N.D.C.C. 52-06-02 |
| Federal grant recipients | Drug free workplace certification required for certain federal grants and contracts | 2 CFR Part 182 |
| DOT safety sensitive positions | Federal testing procedure controls regardless of state law | 49 CFR Part 40 |
Public Employers and Federal Grant Conditions
North Dakota's century code does not establish a standalone, statewide drug free workplace program statute that applies broadly across state agencies the way some states have enacted. State and local agencies that receive certain federal grants or contracts are instead subject to the federal drug free workplace requirements at 2 CFR Part 182, which requires a grantee to certify that it maintains a drug free workplace, publish a policy statement, and take specific steps when an employee is convicted of a workplace related drug violation. An agency or contractor that is unsure whether this federal requirement applies to a specific grant should check the award terms directly rather than assume state law covers the gap.
DOT Preemption for Federally Regulated Positions
None of the North Dakota provisions above override federal testing rules for employees in safety sensitive transportation positions. An employer operating under US Department of Transportation authority, including commercial motor carriers, must run its drug and alcohol testing program under 49 CFR Part 40, the federal procedure governing specimen collection, laboratory certification, and the medical review officer process. Federal law controls the DOT portion of the program regardless of what North Dakota law would otherwise allow, and an employer with both DOT covered and non DOT covered employees generally needs two separate, clearly labeled policies so a DOT test is never confused with a general company policy test.
Screening Versus Confirmation
None of the North Dakota statutes above set out a screening procedure, which leaves that choice to the employer's written policy. A point of care immunoassay cup or dip card gives a fast preliminary result at the collection site, but it is a screen, not a confirmed laboratory finding. Because the workers compensation exclusion in N.D.C.C. 65-01-02 turns on whether intoxicant use actually caused the injury, and because the unemployment misconduct standard in N.D.C.C. 52-06-02 depends on the factual record of the separation, an employer that wants either provision to hold up on review should send a non negotiated positive screen to a certified laboratory for confirmation and build a medical review officer step into the process so a worker with a legitimate prescription has a documented way to explain a result before it is treated as a violation.
Building a Policy Around These Rules
A North Dakota employer that wants its testing program to hold up under the workers compensation exclusion, the unemployment misconduct standard, and the medical marijuana statute's employer provisions needs a written policy in place before any incident, not after. That policy should state which positions are tested and under what circumstances, describe the collection and confirmation procedure, and give employees notice that a confirmed positive result or a refusal can affect both employment and later unemployment or workers compensation outcomes. None of this is legal advice, and whether a specific policy provision holds up depends on facts a North Dakota agency or court would review on its own record, so counsel should review policy language before it is adopted.
Frequently asked questions
Does North Dakota require private employers to drug test their workers?
No. North Dakota has not enacted a statute that requires or comprehensively regulates private employer drug testing. Testing is generally left to the employer's own written policy under the state's at will employment framework.
Can a North Dakota employer discipline an employee who holds a medical marijuana card?
Under N.D.C.C. 19-24.1-34, the state's medical marijuana law does not prohibit an employer from disciplining an employee for possessing or consuming usable marijuana in the workplace, working under the influence of marijuana, or working with marijuana in the employee's system. The statute does not create an employment nondiscrimination protection for registered patients.
Does a positive drug test automatically bar a workers compensation claim in North Dakota?
Not automatically. N.D.C.C. 65-01-02 excludes an injury caused by the use of intoxicants, including recreational marijuana use, or the illegal use of controlled substances, from the definition of a compensable injury, but the exclusion turns on whether the injury was actually caused by that use, which is a factual question reviewed on the claim record.
Can a worker lose unemployment benefits for a failed or refused drug test in North Dakota?
Possibly, under the general misconduct disqualification in N.D.C.C. 52-06-02. The statute text does not use drug specific language, so Job Service North Dakota applies the general misconduct standard to the facts of the separation, including any written testing policy and notice the employee received.
Has North Dakota legalized adult use or recreational marijuana?
No. North Dakota has a medical marijuana program under N.D.C.C. Chapter 19-24.1, but voters have not approved an adult use or recreational marijuana law, and marijuana otherwise remains a controlled substance under state law.
Do DOT rules override North Dakota law for truck drivers and other safety sensitive transportation employees?
Yes. Employees in safety sensitive positions covered by US Department of Transportation rules are tested under 49 CFR Part 40 regardless of North Dakota state law, and DOT covered employers generally keep that program separate from any company wide policy.
Related reading: see how North Dakota fits into the broader state by state drug testing law landscape, and for a look at how legal marijuana status affects workplace programs generally, review marijuana legalization and workplace drug testing. American Screening Corporation supplies drug test cups for employers building a documented, confirmation backed testing program.
This article is general information, not legal or medical advice. Confirm current statute text with the North Dakota legislature and consult qualified counsel before adopting or enforcing a drug testing policy.
