Bill to add due-process rules for no-trespass orders draws wide committee scrutiny

Representative Juliet Harvey Bouley opened testimony on House Bill 143 by describing cases where parents and members of the public received indefinite no-trespass orders on public property and later raised constitutional challenges. "This bill addresses how municipalities and towns address no trespass orders on public property, not private property," Bouley said, adding that the measure seeks to establish an appeal process and more specific limits on duration and scope.

Bouley cited a 2014 case involving a man outside a Nashua library, saying the court found his 14th Amendment rights were violated because there had been no opportunity to contest a verbal order and no end date was given. The bill would require a governing body to vote — in the language presented, unanimously — before an order takes effect and would guarantee the subject a hearing and further appeal rights.

Committee members and witnesses pressed on operational concerns. Several legislators and municipal officers urged an emergency temporary-order mechanism so that school principals, library directors or building managers could immediately remove a disruptive or dangerous person and then have the governing body review the measure at the next meeting. "Sometimes you have people that are very disruptive and maybe even dangerous," the chair said, asking whether a short emergency authority with an immediate but time-limited order would be possible. Bouley said she anticipated friendly amendments to add a temporary emergency process and to consider replacing a unanimous standard with a majority vote.

The New Hampshire School Boards Association opposed the bill as introduced. Christina Barrett, executive director, said no-trespass orders in school settings are rare but when they are issued they are often an immediate response to a safety threat and require swift action by a superintendent. Barrett cited RSA 194-C:4 (duties of superintendents) and warned a unanimous requirement could hamper school leaders' ability to respond quickly: "We would oppose that. We have some school boards that have 11, 13, 15 people. If it's just 1 person that doesn't wanna go along ... We think that should be amended as well too."

Local officials and library representatives described existing policies. John Moriarty of the Laconia Public Library said the library board maintains a policy allowing directors to issue short-term no-trespass orders and a written appeal process to trustees; his account showed how a library can combine immediate director authority with a short internal review. Laconia city officials, represented by Charlie St. Clair and Steven Bogart, said the current bill language would be difficult for cities that need immediate remedies and urged adding a temporary emergency option and clearer appeal notice on orders.

Lawmakers expressed concern about a one-size-fits-all statute that treats distinct public properties identically. Bouley and several members said they were open to tailoring rules by property type and to a committee amendment to create a temporary emergency pathway and change a unanimous threshold to majority vote.

No formal vote was taken. Committee members appointed a subcommittee to work on amendments to address the operational concerns raised by school boards, libraries and municipalities.

Quotes in this report are from committee testimony and come from the list of witnesses and legislators who spoke at the hearing.