New Hampshire asks Supreme Court to ban all consideration of student 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)

Federal courts in New Hampshire have already backed a ban on student IDs for voting, but now the state is appealing to the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the justices to take the ban even further and outlaw any consideration of student identification in the upcoming midterms.

The notice of appeal to the nation’s highest court comes just a day after the 1st U.S. Circuit upheld a federal district court’s ruling affirming a state law that bans student IDs. But the court also refused to overturn part of that ruling that concluded the state could not fully exclude them.

In practice, that means that although student IDs are not an accepted form of voter identification on their own, New Hampshire election officials still have the right to consider them as evidence of a person’s identity when registering to vote or voting in the midterms. 

In April, Gov. Kelly Ayotte (R) signed into law HB 323, which eliminated student IDs as an acceptable form of identification for obtaining a ballot. New Hampshire Secretary of State David Scanlan (R) then directed local election officials to no longer accept student IDs 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.

A pro-voting group sued the state in August to block the ban for the Sept. 8 primary election. But U.S. District Judge Joseph Laplante denied the motion for a preliminary injunction, citing the Purcell principle — a legal doctrine stating that courts should not change voting rules too close to an election because it could confuse voters and officials.

Since then, a legal back-and-forth over the student ID ban has created confusion and uncertainty for students, who already face a range of obstacles to voting.

In his appeal to the Supreme Court, Scanlan said that “re-educating local election officials and the public in a short time is practically impossible and risks voter confusion and inconsistent application of law, if not voter disenfranchisement.”

But the district court’s ruling didn’t block New Hampshire’s student ID ban — it only allows for local election officials to exercise their own discretion in accepting them as evidence that a voter is qualified to vote.