Bill to bar enforcement of WHO, UN and WEF directives draws mixed testimony at House Judiciary hearing

Concord — Lawmakers on the House Judiciary Committee heard hours of testimony on HB 584 — titled in the hearing as “relative to public health, safety, and state sovereignty” — with supporters urging protections from international directives and public-health groups warning the bill could chill local policy and clinical decision-making.

Representative Joseph Grange, the bill’s prime sponsor, told the committee the measure is aimed at preventing international organizations from dictating state policy. “Globalism is an ideology that seeks global governance,” Grange said in his opening remarks. “The point of this bill is to make it very difficult for anti‑American saboteurs within government to violate their oaths and duties and try to enforce the will of international organizations, thus undermining our sovereignty.”

Nurses, public‑health advocates and local residents offered contrasting views. Laura Dolloff, who identified herself as executive director of the New Hampshire Nurses Association, said she relies on information from international and national health organizations in clinical care and opposed HB 584. “I fear HB 584 will place nurses in a dire position in the future as they work to care for patients in New Hampshire,” Dolloff testified, and urged the committee to vote ITL (inexpedient to legislate).

Melissa Blasek of Rebuild NH described the bill as a necessary “Anti‑Globalist Act” and said it would preserve state decision‑making from outside mandates. “We are not trying to restrict the ability of the state to reference research or guidance…but we are ensuring that New Hampshire is not forced into adopting mandates that could come from organizations that are not accountable to our citizens,” Blasek said.

The American Heart Association’s government‑relations director in New Hampshire, Nancy Vaughn, warned the committee that the measure could have a “chilling effect” on local governments that adopt science‑based public‑health policies. “Our concern is whether this would have a chilling effect in any action at the local level, to address issues that impact that community even when action will be supported by a majority of residents and local leaders,” Vaughn said.

Other public commenters criticized the bill as performative. Robert Lollies, who described himself as a Goffstown resident, called the legislation “performative” and said lawmakers should focus on local issues such as housing and education rather than “things that have never happened.” Former Representative Betty Gay, who also testified, told the committee she supported clarifying language to avoid misinterpretation but said she viewed the bill as a preemptive statement about future outside influence.

Committee action and amendments

During the committee’s executive session the committee adopted two committee amendments to the bill that addressed drafting and scope concerns and then approved the measure to advance out of committee. The first amendment (20250966H) clarified a statutory reference involving foreign pharmacy graduates and the World Directory of Pharmacy Schools. The second amendment (20250683H) revised the operative phrase to specify “enforces” mandates, orders or directives of the World Health Organization, United Nations, or World Economic Forum, rather than language that had previously read “create and enforce policies.”

The committee later voted to report HB 584 OTPA (Ought to Pass as Amended) in executive session; the recorded vote in that session was 10 yes, 8 no. The committee asked staff to prepare a consolidated committee amendment incorporating the two technical fixes into the committee’s final recommendation.

Why it matters

HB 584 would create a statutory prohibition on enforcement of mandates, orders, requirements, edicts or directives from named international organizations. Supporters frame the bill as a protection of state sovereignty; critics say it risks restricting access to internationally shared health guidance that clinicians and local governments use when making public‑health decisions. The committee’s amendments narrowed several drafting points but left the underlying policy choice intact.

What’s next

The committee advanced HB 584 as amended. The measure will move to the House calendar; any further changes would occur during floor consideration.