Supreme Court lets New Hampshire refuse student IDs at the polls in November
The unsigned order pauses a lower court ruling less than two weeks before a close U.S. Senate race. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was the only justice to publicly dissent.
The Supreme Court on Oct. 22 cleared the way for New Hampshire to fully bar student IDs as a voting credential in the midterms, granting the state's emergency appeal and blocking the use of student IDs as a backup form of identification, CBS News reported. The order was unsigned and one paragraph long, and the Republican National Committee had filed in support of the state.
The dispute turns on House Bill 323, which Gov. Kelly Ayotte signed in April and which took effect June 2, removing student IDs from the list of IDs expressly accepted for getting a ballot, Fox News reported. New Hampshire Public Radio reported earlier this month that U.S. District Judge Joseph Laplante, ruling in a suit by the Coalition for Open Democracy, let the law stand but blocked a directive from Secretary of State David Scanlan to the extent it barred or discouraged poll workers from considering student IDs as evidence of identity. The judge found the directive likely went further than the law, which includes a safety valve that lets officials weigh other evidence.
The majority relied on the Purcell principle, which holds that federal courts should not change election rules close to an election, and said the lower court "did not point to anything that would justify deviating from that principle," according to Fox News and CBS News. Jackson wrote that an order stopping "material misrepresentations" about state election rules "does not contribute to public confusion, it prevents that very problem." Fox News noted the order is not a final ruling and the case continues.
Attorney General John Formella, a Republican, said the state "has a responsibility to protect the integrity of its elections" and called the decision an important victory against last minute court orders, both outlets reported.
What is established
- The order came on Oct. 22, 12 days before Election Day.
- Only Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson publicly dissented.
- The state law removing student IDs from the accepted list took effect June 2.
- The order is not a ruling on the merits; the underlying suit continues.
What each side says
The state has a duty to protect the integrity of its elections, and the ruling guards against last minute court orders that create uncertainty for voters and election officials.
The lower court left the state law in place and only stopped misleading guidance, so its order prevented voter confusion instead of causing it.
How it was covered
Left 1 report
Network coverage led with the court clearing the way to bar student IDs and noted the close Senate race on the ballot.
Center 1 report
Local public radio coverage of the earlier ruling centered on the judge's finding that the secretary of state went further than the law.
Right 1 report
Fox News led with the timing rule the majority cited, gave Jackson's dissent space and closed on the attorney general's statement.