Supreme Court Lets New Hampshire Bar Student IDs For Voting In The Midterms

The Supreme Court on Thursday cleared the way for New Hampshire to fully bar student IDs for voting in the November 3 midterms, granting the state’s emergency application and staying a federal judge’s orders that would have let election officials consider student IDs as supporting evidence of a voter’s identity. The unsigned order decides only what rules apply while the case proceeds; it does not decide whether the law is constitutional. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was the only justice to publicly dissent.

“This Court has repeatedly emphasized that lower federal courts should ordinarily not alter the election rules on the eve of an election,” the order said, restating the principle associated with Purcell v. Gonzalez. “Here, the District Court did not point to anything that would justify deviating from that principle.” The state had argued that complying with the judge’s order would be “a complete reversal of prior guidance and training,” risking inconsistent procedures and voters arriving “with only their student IDs in-hand.”

Jackson, dissenting: “I respectfully dissent because — even, and perhaps especially, when an election is looming — I would not disturb a clearly justifiable federal-court order issued to ensure that the public receives accurate information about a State’s electoral processes.” Her reasoning, in summary: the district court’s order did not change the election law; it corrected misleading state guidance, so the rule against last-minute changes should not have blocked it.

Student IDs had been accepted as voter identification in New Hampshire since 2012. In April, Republican Gov. Kelly Ayotte signed House Bill 323, removing student IDs from the list of documents expressly accepted for obtaining a ballot; its sponsor, state Rep. Donald McFarlane, said colleges “don’t have the same controls when issuing those cards as government agencies.” Secretary of State David Scanlan then went further than the statute, directing officials not to consider student IDs at all — including under the law’s “safety valve,” which lets officials accept any other evidence that reasonably establishes identity. The law took effect June 2 and was in place for the September primary.

The Coalition for Open Democracy sued in August, arguing the law and the directive burden the right to vote and discriminate against young voters. On October 2, U.S. District Judge Joseph Laplante left the law itself in place but blocked the secretary of state’s broader directive, writing that “the State has offered no independent justification for that broader prohibition.” A First Circuit panel declined to pause his order on October 14, with one judge noting he would have granted the stay. The state applied to the Supreme Court on October 15, backed by the Republican National Committee; the Coalition answered that a second reversal in the final weeks would itself sow confusion: “It would turn away the voters who arrive on November 3 with the evidence the Secretary’s website told them to bring.”

For November 3 the question is settled: a student ID cannot be used at all to prove identity in New Hampshire — not on its own, and not as supporting evidence under the safety valve, which survives for other evidence. Voters must present an accepted government-issued photo ID, such as a driver’s license from any state, a U.S. passport or a military ID. Who may vote is unchanged; students domiciled in New Hampshire may still vote there. The state’s ballot includes an open U.S. Senate seat, with Rep. Chris Pappas facing former Sen. John E. Sununu. “Today’s Supreme Court decision is a victory for common sense,” McFarlane said. “It allows HB 323 to work as intended: strengthening voter identity verification, applying a consistent standard, and maintaining public confidence in New Hampshire elections.” The underlying case continues in the lower courts.

Sources: The Associated Press; USA Today; Democracy Docket; Bloomberg Law.