This story was originally produced by the New Hampshire Bulletin, an independent local newsroom that allows NHPR and other outlets to republish its reporting.
The New Hampshire Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that the House district maps created by the Republican-controlled state Legislature in 2020 are not illegal, despite allegations made by the cities of Dover and Rochester and a number of residents from throughout New Hampshire.
In 2022, Dover, Rochester, and 10 residents filed a lawsuit against the State of New Hampshire and Secretary of State David Scanlan alleging that the state’s maps violated the New Hampshire Constitution. They argued that the constitution requires Dover Ward 4, Rochester Ward 5, New Ipswich, Wilton, Hooksett, Lee, Barrington, and several other towns to have their own state House districts because their populations are large enough to warrant them. The maps currently in use do not give those wards and towns their own districts. They also alleged the map’s population configuration deviates more than 10%, which is a violation of the 14th Amendment’s one-person-one-vote requirement. They ask the court to forbid the state from using the maps and to ostensibly fix them. They provided a map they deemed to be more legal.
In 2024, a trial court in Strafford County ruled against Dover and Rochester, agreeing with the state and Scanlan that creating maps where every city, town, or ward with the necessary population had their own districts would be impossible to accomplish. It also ruled previous case law determined that presumptive violations of the one-person-one-vote requirement may be justified by efforts to make districts compact, respect municipal boundaries, preserve the cores of prior districts, and avoid contests between incumbent representatives. Citing a previous court decision, the court declared that “a legislatively enacted redistricting plan ‘is not unconstitutional simply because some ‘resourceful mind’ has come up with a better one.’”
Dover, Rochester, and the rest of the plaintiffs promptly appealed the ruling and the state Supreme Court considered the case. On Wednesday, the Supreme Court ruled that because they did not sufficiently show that the Legislature had “no rational or legitimate basis” to enact the map, they denied the appeal.
“We are pleased that the New Hampshire Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the state’s redistricting plan for the State House of Representatives,” Attorney General John Formella, who represented the state, said in a statement Wednesday. “Today’s decision reaffirms the Court’s prior precedent recognizing the Legislature’s broad discretion in the area of redistricting and recognizes that the Legislature must balance complex constitutional requirements when determining the most appropriate map. We are delighted that the Supreme Court affirmed the lower court’s finding that the Legislature acted within its constitutional authority, and I thank our litigation and appeals teams for their excellent work in achieving this important outcome.”
Jennifer Perez, Dover’s deputy city attorney wrote in an email to the Bulletin, “We are disappointed in the result but respect the Court’s determination.” Officials from Rochester did not immediately respond to the Bulletin’s requests for comment.
New Hampshire Bulletin is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. New Hampshire Bulletin maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Dana Wormald for questions: info@newhampshirebulletin.com.
