New Hampshire asks the Supreme Court to pause the student-ID ruling; challengers oppose the exclusion
New Hampshire asks the Supreme Court to pause an injunction allowing election officials to consider student IDs with other evidence of identity. The group that sued defends the injunction and still challenges HB 323, which removed student IDs from the accepted list.
Case period:
Published by The Dispute Index editorial teamPublished Updated
Overview
New Hampshire asks the Supreme Court to pause an injunction allowing election officials to consider student IDs with other evidence of identity. The Coalition for Open Democracy, which brought the lawsuit, and its lawyers defend the injunction and continue challenging HB 323, the separate law removing student IDs from the list of accepted IDs.
Read the full background
On October 2, U.S. District Judge Joseph Laplante left HB 323 in place but blocked the Secretary of State's April 23 directive to the extent it barred election officials from considering student IDs as evidence of identity. A separate injunction order followed on October 5. Under the order, a student ID on its own is no longer expressly valid identification, but officials may consider it along with other evidence; registering still requires proof of age, citizenship and domicile. Secretary of State David Scanlan and Attorney General John Formella argue that the court misread state law and that revised instructions weeks before the election risk confusion. The First Circuit denied a stay on October 14 by a 2-1 vote. As of October 17, the Supreme Court docket (opens in a new tab) showed no ruling on their October 15 application. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson requested a response by October 19, and the Republican National Committee filed a brief supporting the stay on October 16.
Timeline
3 timeline entries on this page. Dates: October 2, 2026 to October 16, 2026
October 2026
District court distinguishes HB 323 from the broader student-ID directive
The district court granted partial preliminary relief against the instruction preventing consideration of student IDs as evidence of identity. It left HB 323's removal of student IDs from the mandatory list in place.
[01]Student-ID litigation orders attached to New Hampshire's Supreme Court application
The appendix preserves the distinction between HB 323's list of mandatory IDs and the broader directive excluding student IDs from consideration as other evidence of identity.
Student-ID litigation orders attached to New Hampshire's Supreme Court applicationAppendix: district court opinion and injunction; stay denials; First Circuit order[02]Free Speech For People
Free Speech For People and co-counsel welcome relief against the directive and say they will continue challenging HB 323 itself. The statement acknowledges that the court left that statute in place.
Plaintiff's counsel responds to the student-ID ruling · Free Speech For PeopleStatement of plaintiff's counsel, final paragraphNew Hampshire asks the Supreme Court for a stay
After the district court and the First Circuit declined to pause the injunction, Scanlan and Formella applied to the Supreme Court. Their application argues that the district court misread state law and that changing instructions weeks before the election risks confusion.
[03]New Hampshire application for a stay in Coalition for Open Democracy v. Scanlan
The state asks to pause the injunction pending appeal. It argues that new instructions shortly before the election risk confusion and that the district court misread state law.
New Hampshire application for a stay in Coalition for Open Democracy v. ScanlanApplication, introduction and arguments concerning election timing and state law[01]Student-ID litigation orders attached to New Hampshire's Supreme Court application
The appendix preserves the distinction between HB 323's list of mandatory IDs and the broader directive excluding student IDs from consideration as other evidence of identity.
Student-ID litigation orders attached to New Hampshire's Supreme Court applicationAppendix: district court opinion and injunction; stay denials; First Circuit orderSix State Signal explains what the student-ID ruling permits
Source release
James Mercer wrote in Six State Signal: "A student card does not automatically qualify someone to receive a ballot." The report explains that officials may consider the card with other evidence of identity, while separate voter-eligibility requirements remain.
[04]Six State Signal explains New Hampshire's emergency student-ID appeal
James Mercer explains that a student card may be considered with other evidence of identity, rather than automatically qualifying a voter for a ballot. He reports the October 15 application and the October 19 response deadline.
Six State Signal explains New Hampshire's emergency student-ID appealSecond body paragraph and sections on the ruling and stay request
Claims
Claims separate what was said from what is contested. Follow each source for the original wording and context.
What's disputed
Disputed claim
The student-ID injunction should be paused because the district court misread state law and because changing identity-verification instructions weeks before the election risks confusing voters and election officials.
Sources (1)
- New Hampshire application for a stay in Coalition for Open Democracy v. ScanlanApplication, introduction and arguments concerning election timing and state law
Response record
Responses
Choose one response filter, or select All responses to see the full record.
2 matching responses. Newest first.
David M. ScanlanNew Hampshire secretary of state, applying jointly with Attorney General John Formella through Solicitor General Anthony J. GaldieriDirectly involved Before this statement
On October 2, the district court left HB 323 in place but blocked the April 23 directive to the extent it barred officials from considering student IDs as evidence of identity. The First Circuit denied a stay on October 14.
"the district court premised relief on an incorrect interpretation of New Hampshire law. But even if the merits were “not entirely clearcut,” the Purcell principle overwhelmingly supports a stay of the district court’s order. ... This Court should stay the district court’s orders pending proceedings in the court of appeals and in this Court."
Defended or excusedCase context: New Hampshire asks the Supreme Court to pause the student-ID ruling; challengers oppose the exclusion
Full statement and sources
Scanlan and Attorney General John Formella ask the Supreme Court to pause the injunction while they appeal, arguing that the district court misread state law and that late changes to election rules risk confusion.
After the statement
The application relies on Purcell v. Gonzalez, a 2006 Supreme Court decision cautioning federal courts against changing election rules close to an election. It also asks for an immediate administrative stay while the Court considers the request.
New Hampshire application for a stay in Coalition for Open Democracy v. ScanlanApplication, introduction and arguments concerning election timing and state lawStudent-ID litigation orders attached to New Hampshire's Supreme Court applicationAppendix: district court opinion and injunction; stay denials; First Circuit orderWhy this label?
The reference point is the state's categorical exclusion of student IDs from consideration under existing identity-verification safeguards, the rule in the April 23 directive that the district court blocked on October 2. Scanlan and Formella ask the Court to stay that injunction while they appeal, arguing that it rests on "an incorrect interpretation of New Hampshire law", so we labeled the filing Defended or excused. The closest competing label is Challenged the characterization, since the filing disputes the court's reading of state law; it loses because the application asks to let the state keep enforcing the exclusion while the appeal proceeds.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Free Speech For PeopleCounsel for the plaintiff, the Coalition for Open Democracy, in a statement of plaintiff's counselDirectly involvedBefore this statement
Free Speech For People and the Mintz law firm represent the Coalition for Open Democracy, which sued over HB 323 and the April 23 directive. The October 2 ruling blocked the directive's bar on considering student IDs and left HB 323 in place.
"We are pleased that the court enjoined as unconstitutional any effort by New Hampshire to prohibit or discourage voting officials from considering student IDs as evidence of identification when registering and voting in New Hampshire elections. ... We will continue to urge the courts to recognize that HB 323 violates the constitutional right of students to vote and must be enjoined in its entirety."
CondemnedCase context: New Hampshire asks the Supreme Court to pause the student-ID ruling; challengers oppose the exclusion
Full statement and sources
The plaintiff's lawyers welcome the injunction against barring officials from considering student IDs and say they will keep arguing that HB 323 is unconstitutional.
After the statement
Between these passages, the statement says the court ordered that student IDs may be considered under the safety-valve provision and that the decision did not yet block HB 323.
Plaintiff's counsel responds to the student-ID ruling · Free Speech For PeopleStatement of plaintiff's counsel, final paragraphWhy this label?
The reference point is the state's categorical exclusion of student IDs from consideration under existing identity-verification safeguards, which Secretary of State David Scanlan's April 23 directive set out. Counsel for the plaintiff say they are "pleased that the court enjoined as unconstitutional" any effort to stop officials from considering student IDs as evidence of identification, so we labeled the statement Condemned. The closest competing label is Challenged the characterization; it loses because the statement endorses the finding that the exclusion is unconstitutional rather than disputing how it is described. The further challenge to HB 323 concerns the separate statute.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Sources
(10)
Original text
Student-ID litigation orders attached to New Hampshire's Supreme Court application
Relevant passage: Appendix: district court opinion and injunction; stay denials; First Circuit order
About this source
The appendix preserves the distinction between HB 323's list of mandatory IDs and the broader directive excluding student IDs from consideration as other evidence of identity.
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
InDepthNH reports the student-ID lawsuit and early reactions
Relevant passage: Statements by Ben Horton, John Sellers and Alexis Simpson
About this source
Zach Laird's original InDepthNH report, later distributed through AP, quotes the plaintiff's counsel, an HB 323 cosponsor and the House Democratic leader two days after the lawsuit was filed. Their claims about fraud, security and legality are attributed arguments.
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
RNC supports New Hampshire in student-ID litigation
Relevant passage: Joe Gruters statement
About this source
NHJournal quotes the RNC chairman supporting the state and criticizing the lawsuit's timing. It does not provide evidence of fraud by student-ID users.
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
State and League of Women Voters assess the student-ID injunction
Relevant passage: Statements by Michael Garrity and Liz Tentarelli
About this source
The report quotes the attorney general's spokesman and the League president after the appellate stay was denied. It distinguishes HB 323 from the broader directive and describes student IDs being considered with other evidence.
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Sellers and Simpson assess New Hampshire student-ID restrictions
Relevant passage: Statements by Ben Horton, John Sellers and Alexis Simpson
About this source
InDepthNH reporting distributed through AP quotes a bill sponsor, the House Democratic leader and litigation counsel. Their allegations about fraud and legality are attributed arguments.
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
Voting-rights lawyers challenge New Hampshire student-ID restrictions
Relevant passage: Statements by Hostetler and Horton
About this source
Free Speech For People announces the August 11 lawsuit, separately challenging HB 323 and the broader April directive. Hostetler and Horton speak as counsel.
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
New Hampshire student-ID lawsuit draws support and opposition
Relevant passage: Zink interview and Berry statement
About this source
The Dartmouth interviews Olivia Zink and quotes a statement supplied by Ross Berry about HB 323. Their positions predate the October injunction.
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Six State Signal explains New Hampshire's emergency student-ID appeal
Relevant passage: Second body paragraph and sections on the ruling and stay request
About this source
James Mercer explains that a student card may be considered with other evidence of identity, rather than automatically qualifying a voter for a ballot. He reports the October 15 application and the October 19 response deadline.
- Author
- James Mercer
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
Plaintiff's counsel responds to the student-ID ruling
Relevant passage: Statement of plaintiff's counsel, final paragraph
About this source
Free Speech For People and co-counsel welcome relief against the directive and say they will continue challenging HB 323 itself. The statement acknowledges that the court left that statute in place.
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
New Hampshire application for a stay in Coalition for Open Democracy v. Scanlan
Relevant passage: Application, introduction and arguments concerning election timing and state law
About this source
The state asks to pause the injunction pending appeal. It argues that new instructions shortly before the election risk confusion and that the district court misread state law.
- Published
- Accessed
Share or embed this case
The embed keeps its attribution link to The Dispute Index. Credit the image to The Dispute Index and link to the case page.
Cite this record
- Publisher
- The Dispute Index
- Title
- New Hampshire asks the Supreme Court to pause the student-ID ruling; challengers oppose the exclusion
- First published
- Last updated
- Permalink
- https://disputeindex.com/cases/new-hampshire-student-id-voting-scanlan-supreme-court-stay
The Dispute Index. "New Hampshire asks the Supreme Court to pause the student-ID ruling; challengers oppose the exclusion". First published: 2026-10-18. Last updated: 2026-10-18. https://disputeindex.com/cases/new-hampshire-student-id-voting-scanlan-supreme-court-stay