CONCORD, N.H. – New Hampshire’s attorney general has issued a cease-and-desist notice to national Democratic party leaders, accusing them of violating state law by referring to the state’s presidential primary as meaningless. Attorney General John Formella has ordered the party to stop making such statements, citing laws against voter suppression and criminal solicitation. Although Formella did not explicitly mention the possibility of criminal charges, his office has not ruled it out. The dispute stems from the DNC’s contention that the New Hampshire primary is non-binding, while state officials argue that it holds significance and should not be dismissed. The clash highlights the tension between state and national party rules as the primary season gets underway.
The conflict between the New Hampshire attorney general and national Democratic party leaders began when the co-chairs of the Democratic National Committee’s rules committee sent a letter to New Hampshire party leaders, calling the primary meaningless and detrimental. They urged state officials to educate the public about the non-binding nature of the event, expressing concern over potential confusion for voters.
In response, Attorney General Formella asserted that it is the DNC’s statements that could harm voters. He cited state laws against voter suppression and criminal solicitation, suggesting that the party’s characterization of the primary as meaningless may be misleading and could potentially discourage voter participation. Formella emphasized that regardless of whether the DNC decides to award delegates based on the New Hampshire primary results, the election holds significance according to state law.
The disagreement centers on the scheduling of the primary. New Hampshire’s secretary of state followed state law by setting the primary date at least seven days before any similar contest. However, this put the state at odds with the DNC’s calendar, which aims to prioritize the involvement of minority voters by moving the primary in Michigan and starting with contests in South Carolina and Nevada. President Joe Biden, who sought these changes, did not include his name on the New Hampshire ballot, although Democrats have organized a write-in campaign on his behalf.
Republicans are set to kick off the nomination process with the Iowa caucus, followed by New Hampshire’s primary eight days later. The New Hampshire primary is a critical opportunity for GOP candidates to demonstrate their competitiveness against former President Donald Trump, who is considered the frontrunner for the party’s presidential nomination.
While a spokesperson for the DNC declined to comment on the cease-and-desist notice, New Hampshire Democratic Party Chairman Ray Buckley maintained that the secretary of state had followed the law in scheduling the primary date. He expressed confidence in a strong Democratic voter turnout, dismissing any concerns about the DNC’s popularity in the state.
The dispute highlights the ongoing tensions between state and national party rules, as well as the significance and impact of primaries in the presidential nomination process. As the primary season commences, all eyes will be on New Hampshire to gauge the candidates’ competitiveness and shape the trajectory of the race.
In conclusion, New Hampshire’s attorney general has ordered national Democratic party leaders to refrain from referring to the state’s primary as meaningless, alleging that such statements violate state law. The clash raises questions about the role and significance of primaries, the conflicts between state and national party rules, and the potential impact on voter participation. With the primary season underway, the outcome of this dispute could have lasting implications on the presidential races across party lines.
