Posted on 10/22/2026 3:38:03 PM PDT by CFW
WASHINGTON — In a win for Republicans, the Supreme Court said Thursday that student IDs cannot be used in New Hampshire for the midterm elections.
The justices granted an emergency request filed by the state, which had the backing of the Republican National Committee.
The ballot in New Hampshire includes a closely watched Senate race that could play a key role in deciding control of the chamber. Republican former Sen. John E. Sununu is pitted against Democratic Rep. Chris Pappas for the seat held by retiring Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen.
The brief court order said a federal judge should not have ordered a change in voting rules so close to the Nov. 3 election, citing existing precedent on that point.
“Here, the District Court did not point to anything that would justify deviating from that principle,” the unsigned order said.
Liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was the sole dissenter.
“I would not disturb a clearly justifiable federal court order issued to ensure that the public receives accurate information about a State’s electoral processes,” she wrote.
(Excerpt) Read more at nbcnews.com ...
Dear FRiends,
We need your continuing support to keep FR funded. Your donations are our sole source of funding. No sugar daddies, no advertisers, no paid memberships, no commercial sales, no gimmicks, no tax subsidies. No spam, no pop-ups, no ad trackers.
If you enjoy using FR and agree it's a worthwhile endeavor, please consider making a contribution today:
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you,
Jim
Ooops. I forgot to link to the court’s Opinion. It’s only a paragraph long. Jackson’s dissent is a page and a half.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/26pdf/26a512_6j37.pdf
The dispute arises from a state law enacted in April that removed student IDs from the list of forms of identification that election officials would accept when someone requests a ballot.
Jackson’s dissent is a page and a half.”
I doubt she even read it let alone write it.
👍👍👍
“court order said a federal judge should not have ordered a change in voting rules so close to the Nov. 3 election, citing existing precedent on that point.”
Sounds like it was a ruling on Student ID per se but a more general ruling that the rules can’t be changed so close to an election.
Non-state resident voting by university students was a major source of fraudulent votes in 2020.
Good news.
>>”The dispute arises from a state law enacted in April that removed student IDs from the list of forms of identification that election officials would accept when someone requests a ballot.”
Ketanji - Laws? I spit on your laws!
“Sounds like it was a ruling on Student ID per se but a more general ruling that the rules can’t be changed so close to an election.”
Yep.
Wording of the ruling below:
“This Court has repeatedly emphasized that lower federal courts should ordinarily not alter the election rules on the eve of an election.” Republican National Committee v. Democratic National Committee, 589 U. S. 423, 424 (2020) (per curiam). Here, the District Court did not point to anything that would justify deviating from that principle.
See People Not Politicians v. Onder, 609 U. S. ___ (Sept. 25, 2026). Accordingly, the application for stay presented to JUSTICE JACKSON and by her referred to the Court is granted. The October 2, 2026, and October 5, 2026, orders granting preliminary injunctive relief by the United States District Court for the District of New Hampshire, case No. 1:26–cv–647, are stayed pending the disposition of the appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit and disposition of a petition for a writ of certiorari, if such a writ is timely sought. Should certiorari be denied, this stay shall terminate automatically. In the event certiorari is granted, the stay shall terminate upon the sending down of the judgment of this Court.
Just like snowbirds, some of whom I have always suspected of voting by absentee ballot in their home state and in person in Florida or Arizona or vice versa. With two different addresses and maybe a middle initial in one, but not a middle initial in the other, that had to be so easy.
One of the New England scams was in a state that allowed same-day registration. Students voted in the state where they went to school and then crossed into the border of, maybe New Hampshire, registered with a bogus address and voted. Two votes at least. …. easy easy.
Credit card payments, even some coming from the smallest merchants, are instantaneously recorded in the computer system of the credit card company. Less than a minute later someone who buys an item, can check to see if that credit is listed. Our federal government could know if people vote more than once, but they don’t want to because more than half of the legislators in DC want to cheat.
Excellent!
Plenty of foreign students with student IDs.
When will the Sununu name go away?
It is not so much foreign students at UNH, Dartmouth, SNHU or any of the other NH colleges.
It is the students from out of state.
Primarily other New England states attending college in NH.
Just because you live in a dorm in Durham, NH when you are from Massachusetts should not give you the right to vote in NH. Let all these students vote in their own states.
FYI, this is a big Fn deal.
The Dem strongholds in NH are the college towns.
This could be the difference in the US Senate race and also in the Congress race in district one.
When will the Sununu name go away?
Probably not for a few more years.
JACKSON IS IN LOVE WITH HERSELF & HER “OPINIONS”.,
STUDENTS NATIONWIDE HAVE BEEN VOTING IN PERSON AT THE CAMPUS & BY ABSENTEE AT THEIR PARENTS ADDRESSES.
THEY BRAGGED ABOUT THAT WHEN OBAMA GOT ELECTED
And yet the original law was passed in April, so maybe the court shouldn’t have reversed it so close to an election, or maybe its review should have been expedited. But that’s the game the left likes to play. Use lawsuits to to keep the status up in the air until “It’s too close to the election to change”.
Having said that, I will play a bit of the devil’s advocate here regarding the law itself. Are not students who spend most of their time residing in the state of the school they’re attending not, ipso facto, residents of that state? Perhaps not legally, depending on the state, but in reality they are.
ChatGPT tends to be kinda wordy, donchaknow...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.