Background
New Hampshire House Bill 1569 eliminated two affidavit-based voting procedures. Qualified voter affidavits allowed people registering to vote to establish citizenship, while challenged voter affidavits allowed voters to overcome challenges to their eligibility.
On May 28, 2026, the district court entered statewide injunctive and declaratory relief blocking both changes. State officials reinstated the affidavit procedures for the approaching September 8 primary and November 3 general election, but sought a stay of the district court’s order pending appeal.
The Court’s Holding
The First Circuit denied the motion for a stay pending appeal. Although the court acknowledged difficult questions concerning justiciability and the merits—and assumed for purposes of the motion that the state officials had made a strong showing of likely success—it concluded that they had not established irreparable harm or shown that the equities and public interest favored a stay.
The court emphasized the officials’ lack of urgency. They waited three weeks after the district court’s order to seek a stay there, waited another two weeks after that request was denied to seek relief in the First Circuit, and never requested expedited briefing. Their delay, coupled with the state’s prompt restoration of the affidavit system, undermined their claim of irreparable harm.
The public interest also weighed against a stay because the Secretary of State had told voters that qualified voter affidavits would be available and had instructed election staff accordingly. Abruptly changing course shortly before the elections could cause eligible voters who relied on that representation to arrive without the newly required documents and be turned away. The court therefore found that the aggregate equitable considerations did not justify the extraordinary remedy of a stay.
Key Takeaways
- The First Circuit left the district court’s statewide injunctive and declaratory relief in effect while the appeal proceeds.
- Delay in pursuing stay relief can substantially weaken a claim of irreparable harm, particularly when elections are imminent.
- The court did not decide the appeal’s justiciability or merits issues; it denied interim relief based on irreparable harm, the equities, and the public interest.
Why It Matters
For the upcoming New Hampshire primary and general election, qualified voter affidavits remain available to establish citizenship at registration, and challenged voter affidavits remain available to address eligibility challenges. The order avoids a late change after the state had already informed voters and election workers that the affidavit procedures would be used.
The decision also underscores that parties seeking emergency appellate relief must act promptly. Even a potentially strong merits position may not secure a stay when delay and reliance interests undercut the claimed harm and create a risk that eligible voters will be unable to participate.