New Hampshire asks appeals court to make sure students can’t use IDs to vote

By Matt Cohen

Prefer us on Google

to see more of our voting rights news coverage when you search.

Students gather at a voting information table on campus to learn more about the election process. Students and community members on the University of Pittsburgh campus actively participate in election day activities, engaging with information booths, campaign signs, and festive decorations that promote voter turnout and civic engagement. The event encourages young voters to exercise their rights and fosters community around the democratic process. (Photo by Aaron Jackendoff / SOPA Images/Sipa USA)(Sipa via AP Images)

New Hampshire asked the 1st Circuit Tuesday to overturn a lower court’s ruling that barred the state from fully enforcing a prohibition on election officials accepting student IDs for voting.

The state’s appeal will likely create additional confusion for student voters in the Granite State, who already face a variety of obstacles to casting their ballots and a changing legal landscape around student ID in the run-up to the 2026 midterms. 

On Friday, a federal judge upheld a recent New Hampshire law that bans student IDs as a form of identification for voting. 

But in the same ruling, U.S. District Judge Joseph Laplante — a George W. Bush appointee — said Secretary of State David Scanlan (R) went too far in issuing guidance to election officials fully banning them from accepting student IDs for registering to vote, requesting an absentee ballot and checking in to vote. Laplante said Scanlan’s directive is likely unconstitutional under the First, Fourteenth and Twenty-Sixth Amendments. 

In April, Gov. Kelly Ayotte (R) signed HB 323 into law, which eliminated student IDs as an acceptable form of identification for obtaining a ballot. Scanlan promptly sent guidance to local election officials that they could no longer accept student ID to prove a voter’s identity, including under the state’s safety-valve provision, which lets voters present other evidence to prove their identity when voting.

The pro-voting group Coalition for Open Democracy (COD) sued New Hampshire in August to block the GOP-backed state law from taking effect for the state’s Sept. 8 primary election, but Laplante denied the motion for a preliminary injunction, citing the Purcell principle. Purcell is a legal doctrine stating that courts should not change voting rules too close to an election because it could confuse voters and officials.

However, in his September order, Laplante said that although it was too late to consider changing the rules for the primary, “the general election may be on different footing.”

COD argued that HB 323 illegally discriminates against young voters and that Scanlan exceeded his authority by directing election officials not to accept the IDs. Because Laplante upheld HB 323, but struck down Scanlan’s April directive, a local election official still has the discretion to consider accepting a student ID as part of the evidence that a voter is qualified to vote.

On Tuesday, New Hampshire asked the 1st Circuit to stay the lower court’s ruling, arguing that Laplante “misinterpreted New Hampshire state law” by striking down Scanlan’s directive. The state also said the Purcell principle should apply to Laplante’s ruling.

New Hampshire does not have an early voting period.