Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

College students at heart of voting rights fight in New Hampshire primary

Sen. Bernie Sanders at St. Anselm College

Sen. Bernie Sanders is hoping for another round of strong support from young voters, but in New Hampshire there is confusion over the voting rights for college students from other states.

Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

A day ahead of the New Hampshire primary, college kids are in the center of both the main voting rights fight and concern about confusion at the polls.

The issue is what students from out of state must do in order to vote legally in the first straightforward election of the 2020 Democratic presidential contest. The rules were changed by state law two years ago, with some Republican legislators saying their aim was to make it tougher for young people who grew up outside the Granite State to take part.

But civil rights groups, led by the American Civil Liberties Union, are encouraging every American citizen who's at least 18 years old and wakes up in New Hampshire on Tuesday to head to the polls — potentially causing anger and delays if election judges seek to turn them away.


Some demographic studies project that people younger than 35 will make up the biggest voting bloc by age this year, surpassing people older than 65. Democrats have moved aggressively to corral the youth vote nationally, and Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont rounded up an outsized share as part of his strong showing in Iowa.

Now he and Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts are counting most on strong turnouts by college students to boost their fortunes in New Hampshire. Reports that those voters are being blocked could cause a second wave of furor aimed at the presidential nominating process less than a week after the collapse of the results tabulation process in Iowa.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Students count for as much as 10 percent of the state's eligible voters but a majority come from out of state — and not only at private colleges like Dartmouth, St. Anselm and Franklin Pierce. Half the students at the University of New Hampshire went to high school in another state.

The lack of certainty about their voting rights has been fed by the unresolved status of the ACLU's lawsuits challenging the 2018 law.

The new statute appears at first glance to change the rules for establishing residency in the state, a prerequisite to voting. One suit, on which the state Supreme Court will hear arguments a month from now, asks whether the law explicitly requires people who vote to first obtain a New Hampshire driver's license and vehicle registration — an expensive and inconvenient process that few college students are readily inclined to pursue.

If the court says they must get the documentation in order to exercise their franchise, then the ACLU will press its claim in federal court that the new law amounts to an unconstitutional poll tax.

A four-page document of "frequently asked questions about establishing a domicile / residence in New Hampshire" has been sent to all 301 polling places by the state's attorney general, secretary of state and motor vehicle department head. But it appears to offer some confusing if not contradictory guidance.

The ACLU is telling students who grew up outside New Hampshire to claim they have the right to both register and vote Tuesday by pairing their out-of-state driver licenses with their student IDs and piece of mail addressed to their campus addresses.

Henry Klementowicz of the ACLU says that advice is based on other statutes suggesting that people who consider New Hampshire their home may vote without a state driver's license or vehicle registration. Besides, he said, the very act of registering to vote is one of the requirements under state law for establishing residence.

Also, he and other critics of the law note, voters cannot be compelled to get a New Hampshire license if they don't drive in the state, and they cannot re-register a car they're driving if it's owned by someone (their parents, for example) who doesn't live in the state.

The law was written by a Republican Legislature and signed by GOP Gov. Chris Sununu. The Republicans said they were less worried about the presidential primary (which is open to all, regardless of party) than about a surge of liberal-leaning students from other states tipping the balance of power in New Hampshire. And, in fact, in the 2018 midterm (when the new residency law was not applied) the Legislature flipped to Democratic control.

Democrat Bill Gardner, the longest-serving secretary of state in the country, said the law is defensible because it ends New Hampshire's status as the "only state in the country where you do not have to be a resident to vote."

Read More

Trump to the Nation: "We're Just Getting Started"

U.S. President Donald Trump speaks to a joint session of Congress at the U.S. Capitol on March 04, 2025 in Washington, DC. President Trump is speaking about the early achievements of his presidency and his upcoming legislative agenda.

(Photo by Mandel Ngan-Pool/Getty Images)

Trump to the Nation: "We're Just Getting Started"

On Tuesday, President Donald Trump addressed a joint session of Congress, emphasizing that his administration is “just getting started” in the wake of a contentious beginning to his second term. Significant themes, including substantial cuts to the federal workforce, shifts in traditional American alliances, and the impact of an escalating trade war on markets, characterized his address.

In his speech, Trump highlighted his actions over the past six weeks, claiming to have signed nearly 100 executive orders and taken over 400 executive actions to restore “common sense, safety, optimism, and wealth” across the country. He articulated that the electorate entrusted him with the leadership role and stressed that he was fulfilling that mandate.

Keep ReadingShow less
Trump’s Tariffs: a burden on workers, a boon for the wealthy

An illustration of a deconstructed dollar bill.

Getty Images, rob dobi

Trump’s Tariffs: a burden on workers, a boon for the wealthy

Earlier this year, President Trump imposed tariffs on Canada, Mexico, and China, claiming they would fix trade imbalances and protect jobs. However, instead of helping American workers, these tariffs act as hidden taxes; they drive up costs and feed inflation. While average Americans bear the brunt of higher prices and lost jobs, the wealthy are insulated from the worst effects.

Many economists assert that tariffs are stealth taxes, that is, the burden is not distributed equally—while corporations may adjust by diversifying suppliers or passing costs along, working households cannot escape higher prices on essential goods like groceries and electronics. Analysts estimate these tariffs could add $1,250 to the annual cost of living for the average American household—a substantial burden for families already struggling with inflation. Additionally, according to the well-regarded Tax Foundation, the tariffs are projected to reduce GDP by 0.5% and result in the loss of approximately 292,000 jobs.

Keep ReadingShow less
Veterans diagnosed with asbestos-related diseases should apply for compensation

An individual applying for a program online.

Getty Images, Inti St Clair

Veterans diagnosed with asbestos-related diseases should apply for compensation

In 1922, the U.S. Navy identified asbestos as the most efficient material for shipbuilding insulation and equipment production due to its heat resistance and durability. The naturally occurring asbestos mineral was also the most abundant and cost-effective material on the market. During the difficult WWII years, asbestos became critical to the U.S. Military, especially for the U.S. Navy and the U.S. Air Force: shipping and shipbuilding were essential, and parts of the military aircraft and incendiary bombs also contained asbestos.

Even as demand exceeded supply, in 1942, a presidential order banned the use of asbestos for non-military purposes until 1945. The application of asbestos-based material by the Military continued to increase until the 1970s when its carcinogenic nature came to light, and the use of asbestos started to be regulated but not banned.

Keep ReadingShow less
S.E. Cupp: Where is the Democratic Party’s Ronald Reagan?

President Joe Biden and President-elect Donald Trump arrive for the inauguration ceremony in the U.S. Capitol rotunda in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 20, 2025.

Getty Images/TCA, Melina Mara/POOL/AFP

S.E. Cupp: Where is the Democratic Party’s Ronald Reagan?

With all the attention deservedly on President Trump and what he intends to do with his defiant return to the White House, there’s a more than good chance we’ll spend the next four years consumed once again by all things Trump.

There’s already been a dizzying amount: a giant raft of executive orders; attacks on a constitutional amendment; his threats to invade sovereign nations; a seeming Nazi salute from one of his biggest surrogates; his sweeping Jan. 6 pardons; his beef with a bishop; his TikTok flip-flop; his billion-dollar meme coin controversy; scathing new allegations against one of his Cabinet picks; unilaterally renaming a body of water; a federal crackdown on DEI; promises of immigration raids across major cities. All this in just the first three days of Trump’s second term.

Keep ReadingShow less