CONCORD, N.H. — A federal appeals court has rejected New Hampshire’s request to suspend a ruling allowing election officials to consider student IDs as proof of voter identity, prompting the state to seek emergency intervention from the U.S. Supreme Court.
The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Oct. 14 denied Secretary of State David Scanlan’s request to stay a preliminary injunction issued by U.S. District Court Judge Joseph Laplante earlier this month.
The ruling allows election officials to consider student identification cards as evidence of voter identity when accompanied by other documentation, despite a new state law removing student IDs from the list of acceptable forms of identification for voting.
The appeals court found that the state had failed to demonstrate that a stay was warranted.
“The State has asked the United States Supreme Court for an emergency stay in this matter,” said Michael Garrity, spokesman for the New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office. “New Hampshire has a strong interest in ensuring that its election laws are applied consistently and that local election officials have clear, workable guidance in administering elections.”
The dispute stems from House Bill 323, signed into law by Republican Gov. Kelly Ayotte in April. The law removed student IDs from the list of acceptable identification documents for obtaining a ballot.
Ruling contradicts directive
That same month, Scanlan issued a directive advising election officials that student IDs could not be used as proof of identity when registering to vote, requesting an absentee ballot or checking in at the polls.
In August, Free Speech for People filed a lawsuit on behalf of the Coalition for Open Democracy, a voter education and outreach organization, seeking to block enforcement of both the law and Scanlan’s directive before the November election.
Laplante partially granted the coalition’s request for a preliminary injunction, finding that the secretary of state’s directive went beyond the requirements of the new law.
The judge declined to block HB 323 itself but prohibited the state from enforcing Scanlan’s directive to the extent that it prevents or discourages election officials from considering student IDs as evidence of voter identity.
In his ruling, Laplante wrote that even a minimal burden on voting rights must be justified by a legitimate state interest. He found that the state had identified no interest served by Scanlan’s directive beyond those already addressed by HB 323.
Legal challenges to continue
Free Speech for People welcomed the decision but said its legal challenge would continue.
“We are pleased that the court enjoined as unconstitutional any effort by New Hampshire to prohibit or discourage voting officials from considering student IDs as evidence of identification when registering and voting in New Hampshire elections,” the organization said in an online statement.
The group emphasized that the court had not struck down HB 323.
“We will continue to urge the courts to recognize that HB 323 violates the constitutional right of students to vote and must be enjoined in its entirety,” the statement said.
Liz Tentarelli, president of the League of Women Voters of New Hampshire, also welcomed the ruling but expressed concern that the legal dispute could confuse students ahead of the election.
“We at the League of Women Voters New Hampshire think this is a good ruling that student IDs should be considered in spite of the law passed last spring,” Tentarelli said.
She said election officials should use other available means to verify the identity of voters presenting student IDs rather than turning them away.
Additional restrictions
Tentarelli argued that Scanlan’s directive created additional restrictions not explicitly contained in the legislation, particularly concerning voter registration.
“When it got extended by the Secretary of State to include voter registration, that was an assumption that was not spelled out in the bill,” she said.
The resulting uncertainty, she said, could discourage eligible students from voting.
“I think, unfortunately, students are going to feel confused, and when people are confused that suppresses the vote,” Tentarelli said.
She emphasized that the ruling does not eliminate other voter eligibility requirements, including proof of residency, age and citizenship.
Students who lack another acceptable form of identification may still be able to use their student IDs as supporting evidence of identity, she said, although additional documentation or procedures may be required.
Turning to Supreme Court
The League of Women Voters continues to encourage students to bring government-issued identification, including out-of-state IDs or passports, even if expired, when attempting to register or vote.
But Tentarelli said students who have only a student ID should not assume they are ineligible to cast a ballot.
“If all you have is your student ID, you should be allowed to vote,” she said, expressing hope that election officials will understand the court’s ruling and apply it consistently.
Scanlan could not be reached for comment.
The state has now turned to the U.S. Supreme Court in an effort to suspend the injunction while the underlying legal challenge proceeds.