U.S.
Supreme Court stay restores New Hampshire’s student-ID limits for Nov. 3 vote
The Oct. 22 order suspends two preliminary injunctions while an appeal proceeds. It does not decide whether New Hampshire’s law or the secretary of state’s broader guidance is constitutional.
Executive summary
- The order: On Oct. 22, the Supreme Court stayed two New Hampshire federal-court injunctions that had required election officials to consider student IDs alongside other evidence when verifying voter identity. The stay lasts while the state’s First Circuit appeal proceeds and, if timely filed, while a certiorari petition is resolved.[1][2]
- What changes: The stay leaves New Hampshire’s April directive unblocked for the Nov. 3 election. That directive tells officials not to treat student IDs as identity evidence in the state’s fallback process. It is broader than the statute’s removal of student IDs from the expressly accepted photo-ID list for obtaining a ballot.[1][2][3]
- What remains open: The Supreme Court did not decide the merits of the lawsuit. The First Circuit appeal is still pending, and the district judge had treated the statute and the secretary’s directive as separate questions.[4][2][5]
The Supreme Court’s Oct. 22 order stayed two preliminary-injunction orders issued by U.S. District Judge Joseph Laplante on Oct. 2 and Oct. 5. Those orders had stopped the state from enforcing parts of Secretary of State David Scanlan’s April guidance and required revised instructions for the Nov. 3 general election. The Supreme Court said its stay will remain in place through the First Circuit appeal and any timely request for Supreme Court review.[1][2]
As a result, the injunctions no longer prevent officials from following the April directive. The Associated Press and New Hampshire Public Radio report that school-issued IDs cannot be used as backup evidence of identity under the state’s fallback procedure for voters who lack an expressly accepted photo ID. Other identity-verification methods under state law remain available; the court did not say a student ID is the only way to cast a ballot.[6][3][2]
New Hampshire’s 2026 law removed student cards from the list of photo documents expressly accepted to establish identity when a voter obtains a ballot. Laplante’s preliminary ruling left that statutory change in place. He separately blocked the secretary’s April directive where it barred officials from considering a student card with other evidence under the state’s identity-verification safety valve, including during registration and ballot qualification.[2][3][6]
The Supreme Court’s short, unsigned order cited its precedent that federal courts ordinarily should not alter election rules close to an election. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented. She wrote that the district court had left the state law untouched and had instead ordered officials to correct public guidance she viewed as misleading; the majority’s order did not answer that argument or explain the case’s merits.[1][7][3]
The Coalition for Open Democracy and other plaintiffs argue that the restrictions burden young voters and violate constitutional protections. The state has defended the rules as an election-integrity measure. In his preliminary ruling, Laplante did not find the plaintiffs likely to prevail against the statute itself, but found a basis to enjoin the broader directive while the case proceeded. Those were preliminary conclusions; the Supreme Court’s stay does not resolve the underlying claims.[5][2][1]
NHPR reported that local election officials consider it uncommon for a student to arrive without any other identity document, though the order narrows the evidence officials may consider in that situation. With Election Day less than two weeks away when the Supreme Court acted, the immediate dispute is about which guidance officials can follow in November; the longer-term legal challenge remains pending.[3][4]