Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Election Law topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sponsor seeks to let citizens sue over alleged violations of RSA 6:59 after DOJ review; opponents worry about timing and litigation consequences
Summary
Rep. Ross Berry told the committee HB 514 would allow private suits when the attorney general declines to act, with a 5-day DOJ response window and an exception for disputes within 15 days of an election; a witness urged caution and said the bill may be unnecessary.
Representative Ross Berry introduced HB 514, a bill intended to let private individuals bring lawsuit claims for violations of RSA chapter 6:59 when the attorney general’s office does not act. Berry said the change responds to a court interpretation that the chapter’s final clause gives the attorney general exclusive authority to pursue certain election-law violations in court.
“Only the attorney general can…adjudicate a violation of 6 59,” Berry said, describing his view that the court’s reading leaves citizens without a judicial remedy if the Department of Justice declines to pursue a complaint. The bill would require a citizen to bring concerns first to the attorney general’s office and give DOJ five days to respond; if the matter arises within 15 days of an election, the bill would allow a direct filing in court given the time sensitivity.
Berry said the bill includes qualified-immunity protections to avoid chilling meritorious claims. He added that attorney-fee recovery would require superior-court approval and that the party seeking judicial relief would generally be responsible for costs unless the court ordered otherwise.
Timothy Horrigan, who testified later, warned the committee the draft “goes too far” and could let a wide set of parties sue over election administration; he suggested the bill may duplicate existing avenues such as the ballot-law commission and faster administrative remedies and urged the committee to refer the bill to study (ITL). Other witnesses who testified opposed the bill on the blue sheet, and online testimony showed a larger number of opponents than supporters.
Committee members asked detailed questions about statutory language and whether the bill would expose individual election officials to personal suits; Berry said the bill attempts to balance the right to seek redress with safeguards to prevent frivolous litigation. The hearing closed with a record of mixed public testimony online and in writing.
