Concord, NH -- Attorney General John M. Formella announces that the New Hampshire Supreme Court has issued a published opinion in Miles Brown & a. v. Secretary of State, No. 2022-0629, holding that partisan redistricting claims present non-justiciable political questions under the New Hampshire Constitution.

“We are pleased that the Court agreed with our arguments and held that partisan redistricting claims present non-justiciable political questions,” said Attorney General Formella. “This opinion means that in New Hampshire, partisan and political questions related to redistricting will continue to be placed where they belong: in the hands of the people’s elected representatives. I thank our entire team for their excellent work on this case.”

The case involved challenges to the current boundaries for New Hampshire State Senate and Executive Council districts. The plaintiffs argued that these districts violated the New Hampshire Constitution because they were drawn for the purpose of partisan advantage. The plaintiffs asked the superior court to invalidate the boundaries and for the court to adopt its own redistricting plans. The superior court dismissed the plaintiffs’ claims on the ground that they presented non-justiciable political questions, meaning that the claims are outside of the jurisdiction of the judicial branch to resolve.

On appeal, the Supreme Court affirmed the superior court’s decision. The Supreme Court concluded that the text of the New Hampshire Constitution commits redistricting to the legislature, not the judicial branch. The Supreme Court further concluded that the provisions of the New Hampshire Constitution that the plaintiffs invoked did not provide judicially discernible and manageable standards for resolving partisan redistricting claims. The Supreme Court held that “[i]n the absence of established limitations on partisan gerrymandering as adopted by statute or by constitutional amendment, . . . the issue presented poses a non-justiciable political question.”

A copy of the Supreme Court’s opinion is attached.