Supreme Court Allows New Hampshire to Bar Student IDs for Voting
publishers 98articles 186first reported 3 Oct, 09:00 UTCdeveloping since 3 Oct · 30 editions
The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday allowed New Hampshire to fully prohibit voters from using student IDs as identification in the midterm elections, granting a Republican-backed emergency appeal.
A state law passed this year removed student IDs from the forms of identification expressly accepted for obtaining a ballot. New Hampshire’s secretary of state subsequently issued guidance barring their use as a backup method of verifying a voter’s identity. A lower-court judge left the law intact but blocked that guidance in early October, prompting the state’s appeal. The Republican National Committee supported the state’s request.
In an unsigned, one-paragraph decision, the Supreme Court cited the Purcell principle, under which lower federal courts ordinarily should not change election rules shortly before an election. The court said the lower court had not identified a reason to depart from that principle.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was the only justice to publicly dissent. She argued that the lower court’s order had left the state’s election rule untouched and therefore did not necessarily raise Purcell’s concern about last-minute judicial changes to election procedures.
New Hampshire Attorney General John Formella praised the ruling, saying it protected the application of state election laws and avoided uncertainty for voters and election officials.
HOW THIS STORY WAS MADE
Written from 8 articles, 5 with the publisher's own text; 8 independent newsrooms once syndicated copies count as one; this version written 486 h after the record first saw the story; the editor kept it as written.
- Publishers
- 98
- Source articles
- 186
- Given to the writer
- 8, 5 with the article's own text
- Independent newsrooms
- 8
- This version written
- 486 h after the record first saw the story
- Second model (editor)
- kept as written
- Publication gate
- passed
- Human review
- none
WHAT THE EDITOR DID
The second model checked the writer's draft against the same sources and published it as written.
Written by a language model from the sources above, then checked by a second model that may only cut, attribute or correct. How it works →