Supreme Court lets New Hampshire bar student IDs for voting
Archived — this story has rotated out of today’s deck. It is kept here in full.
The gist
The Supreme Court paused a lower-court order, letting New Hampshire stop accepting student IDs for voting.
The unsigned ruling lands under two weeks before the midterms, with one justice dissenting.
Background
New Hampshire Republicans passed HB 323 in April 2026, removing student IDs from the forms of identification expressly valid to obtain a ballot; Gov. Kelly Ayotte signed it, and Secretary of State David Scanlan issued a directive saying student IDs could not be used as proof. The Coalition for Open Democracy, a nonprofit that helps high schools promote and run voter-registration drives, sued in federal court, arguing the law burdens the right to vote and was meant to discriminate against young voters. In early October, U.S. District Judge Joseph Laplante declined to block the student-ID provision but barred the state from enforcing Scanlan's directive where it discouraged officials from weighing student IDs as evidence of identity under a "safety-valve" provision. The Supreme Court's brief, unsigned order paused that ruling, citing the Purcell principle that lower federal courts should ordinarily not alter election rules on the eve of an election.
How it unfolded
- Apr 2026New Hampshire legislators passed HB 323, a Republican-authored law removing student IDs from the forms of identification expressly valid to obtain a ballot; Gov. Kelly Ayotte signed it. Secretary of State David Scanlan issued a directive stating student IDs cannot be used as proof under the new law.
- Jun 2026HB 323 went into effect.
- Aug 2026The Coalition for Open Democracy sued in federal court, arguing the law burdens the right to vote and was intended to discriminate against young voters.
- Early Oct 2026U.S. District Judge Joseph Laplante declined to block the student-ID provision but barred the state from enforcing Scanlan's directive to the extent it prohibits or discourages election officials from considering student IDs as evidence of voter identity under a "safety-valve" provision.
- Oct 2026The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit turned down the state's request to pause Laplante's ruling; Scanlan asked the Supreme Court to step in, and the Republican National Committee weighed in to support the state.
- Oct 22, 2026The Supreme Court issued a brief, unsigned order pausing Laplante's ruling, citing the Purcell principle; Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was the lone dissenter.
Who’s saying what
- Official
- Republican New Hampshire Attorney General John Formella said the state has a responsibility to protect election integrity and apply its laws as written, calling the ruling a victory that prevents last-minute court orders from creating uncertainty.
- Dissent
- Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said she would not disturb a clearly justifiable federal-court order issued to ensure the public receives accurate information about a state's electoral processes, noting Laplante's order was targeted at alleged misinformation and left the state election rule untouched.
- Party
- Josh Orton, president of Demand Justice, called the decision absurd, saying a college student cannot use a student ID to vote, and urged expanding the Court.
- Support
- Secretary of State David Scanlan said Laplante's order would require undoing steps taken since April, including student voting guides, posters, website updates, social media outreach, radio ads and public events, and that Purcell considerations are at their apex here.
- Caution
- The Coalition for Open Democracy argued that unlike other Purcell cases, Laplante did not block a state law.
Still unverified
The Coalition for Open Democracy's claims that the law burdens the right to vote and was intended to discriminate against young voters are allegations in its lawsuit, not established findings.