James Bassett worked for nearly 30 years as an attorney. Then in 2012, he was confirmed as a New Hampshire Supreme Court justice, a seat he held until Aug. 31, when he formally retired from the bench. Bassett sat down with NHPR’s All Things Considered host Julia Furukawa to reflect on his time on the bench, and where he sees the court headed.
Interview highlights:
On why he retired a year before the mandatory retirement age
“While I really enjoyed my time on the court, it seemed like it was appropriate to try to strike a different balance in terms of my work and the rest of my life. I will miss my colleagues. I'll miss the issues that we had to grapple with at the court. But it's good to have new and exciting opportunities and more time to travel and be with family.”
On the court’s decision in the July 2025 ConVal school funding case
“I think one needs to view this litigation in the context of separation of powers in New Hampshire. It's the obligation and the duty of the court to decide what is constitutional and what is not. And we did that in the recent Contoocook Valley School District (ConVal) v. State case. It's quite another matter to order another co-equal branch of government to, in essence, raise $500 million or up and to order doing that immediately. The majority in the recent decision did not feel [it] was appropriate given separation of power concerns. So obviously the opinion speaks for itself. But there was a belief among the majority that the legislature should have an opportunity to address the issue rather than the court entering an order.”
On cases that have stood out to him during his time on the court
“During my time on the court, 13 years, there were probably 10,000 cases that came to our court. So we're deciding so many issues that don't reach a high level of visibility with the public. But we had a series of cases on voting rights during the time that I was on the court. In my view, voting is the fundamental bedrock right that citizens in New Hampshire have. When issues arise regarding voting, it's something that the court regards as very important and very serious. There were a series of those cases decided while I was on the court. We decided just two years ago in the Miles Brown v. Secretary of State case regarding whether partisan gerrymandering was justiciable before the courts. The majority of the courts said it was not. I wrote a dissent in that case.”
On how he sees his role as a New Hampshire Supreme Court justice
“Specific cases come in front of us and our job is to decide those specific cases. They obviously set precedent for cases in the future. But I think we're always mindful of the fact that there's a law of unintended consequences. So you want to try to think through the consequences and write an opinion that's as narrow as possible to let the next case and the next circumstance move the law forward as required.”
On the decline of trust in the justice system and what that means for New Hampshire's courts
“I do worry about it in terms of what it means for the New Hampshire courts, what it means nationally and what it means just for [the] government in general. In New Hampshire, our court has come out strongly in favor of more civics education. We're all concerned about the declining faith in the overall system of government.
In the judiciary in particular, I think there's more faith and confidence in [state judiciaries] than in the federal judiciary. But still, it's a matter of concern for us. Certainly the judicial branch wants to take the lead in terms of helping people understand the job that the courts do and the role that the courts play in a healthy and functioning government. So the court is willing to take the lead in that type of public education.”
On what the state can do to address the shortage of indigent defense lawyers in New Hampshire
“We're working with some ARPA funding that we've gotten in the last couple years. We’re working to make the court a more user-friendly place for people who are self-represented. The reality is that not everybody who's in the court system is going to be able to have a lawyer. As desirable as that would be, it's just not likely to happen. So we're trying to make the system work better for people who are self-represented. The court supports New Hampshire Legal Assistance and tries to support and facilitate that type of pro bono effort, as well by lawyers in the state.”
On advice to Bryan Gould, who was nominated by Gov. Kelly Ayotte to fill Bassett’s seat
“Well, I know Brian. He and I had a very hotly contested case against each other about 15 years ago. He's a fine lawyer, a person of great integrity. I think if confirmed for the court, he'll do a great job.
I think the thing I would say is to keep an open mind and to not be afraid to present your views to the court. I think one of the biggest potential flaws for someone on a court is to be very certain of your correctness, because I think you always have to be asking questions about your position. Is it right? And so I think, being open minded, listening to others and being self-questioning is very important.”
On a New Hampshire Supreme Court tradition
“I think there is a tradition that I was not aware of before I came on the court — it’s not a secret, but most people don't know about it — which is the way we pick the cases that each of us are going to write opinions on. Unlike the U.S. Supreme Court, where that decision is made by the chief justice or the senior member of the majority or the dissent, at our court, that determination is made about a month before oral arguments. We pass a pitcher around the table that has the names of every case that we're going to hear the next month. And justices physically pull the names out of the pitcher, and that's the case that they're going to write. So I think lawyers traditionally have spent a lot of time trying to figure out why a certain justice is writing a certain case, but that's been the tradition for quite some time at our court.”
