The New Hampshire Supreme Court says holding House sessions remotely would not violate a constitutional provision about what constituents a quorum.
The House has been meeting at the University of New Hampshire to allow for greater social distancing during the coronavirus pandemic. Democrats voted in September to ask the court to weigh in on the possibility of remote sessions.
Opponents argued that doing so would violate other provisions of the constitution, particularly one guaranteeing public access to government.
The court, however, limited its answer to the narrow question regarding quorum requirements.