The Hampton, New Hampshire Board of Selectmen approve new voting machines for March 2025.

The best part is, at the October 28, 2024, public meeting, both the selectmen and the town moderator acknowledged that the current 25-year-old voting machines were out of date. They want them replaced for the March election, but they appear to be satisfactory for the 2024 General Election!

The use of Ballot counting devices have never been ratified by the people of New Hampshire. Below is a summary of the recent injunctive relief filed by state constitutional scholar Daniel Richard in the Rockingham Superior court.

Ex Parte motion for injunctive relief

.pdf

Download PDF • 163KB

The motion filed in the Rockingham County Superior Court seeks a temporary injunction to prevent the counting of unverified absentee ballots and the use of voting machines in New Hampshire’s November 5th election. This motion, remanded by the New Hampshire Supreme Court for further proceedings, is based on alleged equal protection violations that the plaintiff claims make the current election process unfair.

Key Points:

1. Supreme Court Ruling: The New Hampshire Supreme Court found that the plaintiff has standing to claim that certain election practices violate his equal protection rights. These include the discretionary use of voting machines, unverifiable machine-counted ballots, unreliable recount procedures, and alleged vote dilution.

2. Arguments for Injunction:

   • Unequal Use of Voting Methods: The plaintiff argues that using voting machines in some communities while others hand-count ballots create an unequal election process. The plaintiff claims this violates both state and federal constitutions and asks the court to mandate uniform ballot counting methods.

   • Unverified Absentee Ballots: The plaintiff argues that absentee ballots lack proper verification under current procedures, allowing unverified ballots to be counted. This, he claims, violates state law, which requires moderators to confirm the validity of absentee affidavits.

   • Voting Machine Reliability: The plaintiff asserts that voting machines obscure the counting of unverified absentee ballots, potentially leading to inaccurate counts and irreparable harm.

3. Public Interest: The plaintiff contends that requiring uniform hand-counting for the November 5th election serves the public interest, ensuring a fair, equal, and transparent election free from government interference.

4. Likelihood of Success: The plaintiff believes he has a strong case, noting the state’s failure to deny his claims and asserting that under court rules, undisputed allegations are effectively admitted.

   
   

The plaintiff ultimately requests that the court mandate all communities to hand-count ballots to prevent unequal treatment and ensure election integrity.

WHAT IS THE TOWN OF HAMPTON DOING?