Committee adopts amendment and passes SB 464 amid warnings it weakens civil-rights enforcement

The House Judiciary Committee on March 31 adopted a contested amendment to Senate Bill 464 and then voted 10-8 to report the bill as amended. SB 464 would change the statutory wording used to prove bias-motivated interference with civil rights, including adding modifiers such as "substantially motivated by" and terms like "hostility." The bill and the chair's amendment drew sustained opposition from the Department of Justice and disability, civil-rights and faith-based groups.

Senior Assistant Attorney General Shawn Lock, speaking for the Department of Justice, urged the committee to reconsider. "As written, this bill would move New Hampshire in the wrong direction," he said, warning that qualifiers such as "substantially motivated by" and a requirement of "hostility" would narrow the reach of current protections and make enforcement uncertain. Lock cited rising numbers in national and state hate-incident reporting and said the department would be willing to work with stakeholders to modernize the statute rather than narrow it.

A wide range of community witnesses echoed those concerns. Vanessa Blaze, policy director for the New Hampshire Council on Developmental Disabilities, told lawmakers that anti-disability incidents have risen and that the proposed language would place an additional evidentiary burden on victims who already struggle to have incidents recorded and addressed. "When the cases that reach the legal system already represent a fraction of actual incidents, that burden falls on the most vulnerable victims," she said.

Sponsor Senator Avard and supporters framed the bill as a clarification ensuring the statute addresses conduct targeted at protected characteristics rather than incidental or unrelated trespass. The sponsor argued the amendment would reduce the risk of prosecuting non-targeted acts, citing the Hood/Portsmouth sign case as an example of legal ambiguity. Committee members questioned how the changes would work in practice and whether they could unintentionally shield bias-motivated conduct.

After extended floor debate in committee the chair's amendment (2026-1369H) was adopted by roll call, 10-8, and the committee voted to pass SB 464 as amended on a 10-8 roll call. Representative Birch said she would prepare a minority report recommending ITL. The majority report will recommend passage as amended; proponents and opponents can further contest the bill on the House floor.

What happens next: The committee will file a majority report recommending passage as amended and a minority ITL report. The bill will be placed on the calendar for a floor vote where the full House will decide whether to pass SB 464 into law or to reject it.