Staff Reports
A federal judge just split the baby on New Hampshire’s voter ID fight — and he did it in a way that should make both common-sense conservatives and defenders of the rule of law nod, if grudgingly. U.S. District Judge Joseph N. Laplante refused to upend rules right before the primary but also rebuked Secretary of State David M. Scanlan for unilaterally expanding a new law to cover voter registration. The bottom line: the legislature trimmed student IDs from the list of ballot IDs, but the Secretary went too far when he tried to ban their use during registration as well.
Judge Laplante’s split decision: what happened
Judge Laplante denied an emergency order to block the student‑ID ban before the state primary, citing the Purcell principle that courts should not change election rules at the last minute. That was sensible caution. But after more briefing, the court granted limited preliminary relief: it enjoined the Secretary’s April directive that told clerks student IDs “cannot be used” even as evidence under the registration safety‑valve. As the judge put it plainly, “The State has offered no independent justification for that broader prohibition.” So HB 323 stands as written, but the Secretary cannot administratively rewrite the law to bar student IDs from registration.
Why this matters for students and election integrity
The practical effect is clear. HB 323 removed student IDs from the explicit list of acceptable IDs to get a ballot, meaning students will need a government‑issued photo ID like a driver’s license or passport to cast a ballot. But the court protected the narrow ability for election officials to consider student IDs in registration disputes — the so‑called “safety‑valve.” That matters because many students live here temporarily, DMV access is limited in parts of the state, and there are fees and time costs tied to getting a state ID. Conservatives who believe in election integrity should also believe in fair rules that don’t create needless barriers to lawful voters.
Scanlan’s overreach and the separation of powers
Let’s call this what it is: a bureaucrat trying to do the job of lawmakers. The legislature removed student IDs from the ballot list; it did not rewrite the registration statute. Secretary Scanlan’s April guidance went beyond the law, telling town clerks to treat student IDs as worthless for registration purposes. The court rightly checked that administrative overreach. If you’re serious about rule‑of‑law conservatism, you don’t applaud bureaucrats who expand rules by fiat — even when the goal (stricter ID rules) is something you support.
What comes next
The case will continue, and the Secretary will have to issue revised guidance ahead of the general election. The state may appeal, and questions about implementation remain. Lawmakers who wanted stricter ID checks should either finish the job with clear statutory language or fund practical fixes — more DMV hours, fee waivers for student IDs, or streamlined state IDs for college students — so integrity doesn’t come at the expense of fairness. Judge Laplante’s rulings strike a practical balance: respect the will of the legislature, reject administrative overreach, and avoid last‑minute changes that scramble voters and clerks. That’s the kind of common‑sense outcome most Granite Staters should be able to live with — and expect from their leaders.
