Supreme Court Lets New Hampshire Bar Student IDs at Polls

An unsigned order lifts a lower-court ruling on the state's voter ID guidance less than two weeks before Election Day; Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented.

By Richthrax · Oct. 25, 2026

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday, Oct. 22, allowed New Hampshire to bar student IDs as a backup form of voter identification in the Nov. 3 midterm election.

In a brief, unsigned order, the court granted an emergency request from the state and paused a federal judge's ruling while the state's appeal proceeds, SCOTUSblog reported. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was the only justice to publicly dissent. The Republican National Committee filed in support of the state, according to CBS News.

The case is Scanlan v. Coalition for Open Democracy.

The law and the lower court

New Hampshire's Legislature passed House Bill 323 this year, removing high school, college and university ID cards from the IDs voters can use to prove identity at the polls, the Valley News reported. Gov. Kelly Ayotte signed it in April. Secretary of State David Scanlan then issued guidance barring student IDs as a backup way to prove identity, CBS News reported.

The Coalition for Open Democracy, the League of Women Voters of New Hampshire and the Forward Foundation sued, according to the Valley News. They argued many students lack driver's licenses or passports and that the state's $20 non-driver ID is hard to obtain.

In an Oct. 2 order, U.S. District Judge Joseph Laplante left the law in place but blocked Scanlan's guidance to the extent it discouraged officials from accepting student IDs under a separate "safety-valve" provision, SCOTUSblog reported. The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals refused to pause that ruling, and Scanlan went to the Supreme Court.

The court's reasoning

The order relied on the so-called Purcell principle, quoting a 2020 decision that lower federal courts "should ordinarily not alter the election rules on the eve of an election," CBS News reported. The court said the lower court "did not point to anything that would justify deviating" from that principle.

The state had argued that student IDs lack expiration dates, could be used after graduation and often lack anti-counterfeiting features, the Valley News reported, and that re-educating officials and the public before Election Day was "practically impossible."

The dissent and reactions

Jackson wrote that a case involving a court order that "left the state election rule untouched" does not "necessarily fall within the ambit of Purcell," according to CBS News. She wrote that Laplante "issued a targeted order" that was "reasonably designed to address alleged misinformation, not to change the law," SCOTUSblog reported.

Republican Attorney General John Formella said New Hampshire "has a responsibility to protect the integrity of its elections," CBS News reported. He called the ruling "an important victory for our efforts to defend those laws and prevent last-minute court orders from creating uncertainty for voters and election officials."

Counsel for the coalition called the order "wrong," said it was "injecting confusion into the election" and said it would authorize "an unconstitutional policy that will deprive young voters of their right to vote," FOX 9 reported.

Before the ruling, the challengers had argued that Scanlan's revised guidance was the status quo. "A stay wouldn't preserve it. It would reverse the rules for a second time in a month," they wrote, according to the Valley News.

The ruling came less than two weeks before New Hampshire voters cast ballots in a closely contested U.S. Senate race, CBS News reported.