By KATHARINE WEBSTER, InDepthNH.org
The House Judiciary Committee on Friday unanimously recommended killing a resolution that could have led to an impeachment investigation against the state’s only Democratic Executive Councilor, Karen Liot Hill.
At the beginning of Friday’s meeting, Chairman Bob Lynn, R-Windham, announced that the committee most likely would vote House Resolution 41 “inexpedient to legislate,” because the chief sponsor, Rep. Joe Sweeney, R-Salem, had requested it.
In brief remarks, Liot Hill thanked the committee, noting that the state attorney general had investigated her over the same claims that inspired HB 41 – that she had improperly used her official email to connect disabled and other voters with a law firm planning to sue the state over new voting restrictions – and found no violation of state law or ethics rules.
“My emails were typical constituent services,” Liot Hill said. “An impeachment has never taken place in New Hampshire against an elected official, and I do believe that’s because in New Hampshire we have 2-year terms … and voters are the ones who hold their elected officials accountable.”
The committee voted unanimously against recommending the bill and put it on the consent calendar for the full House, which is expected to consider it in two weeks.
Sweeney said in an email immediately after the hearing that, while he was unable to attend in person Friday because of family obligations, he had filed HR 41 to make sure that constitutional questions arising from Liot Hill’s conduct “were addressed seriously and transparently.”
HR 41 accused Liot Hill of “maladministration” and a conflict of interest for helping an out-of-state law firm find plaintiffs to sue over new state laws on voter IDs and absentee voting.
A trial was held earlier this month in a federal lawsuit brought by the Coalition for Open Democracy, the American Civil Liberties Union and several individuals over a 2024 law requiring voters to show proof of citizenship when registering for the first time. In December, a state judge threw out another lawsuit over a 2025 law imposing new ID requirements on absentee voters.
On Friday, Sweeney did not immediately respond to a question asking when he had decided to withdraw support for HR 41, but said that, “After reviewing the matter and hearing the discussion, I believe the appropriate course is to move forward and allow the voters and the political process to do their work.”
Sweeney had previously accused Liot Hill of “political lawfare” by supporting a lawsuit against the state whose laws she had sworn to uphold.
Kennard Soleyn, a member of the Londonderry Democratic Committee who spoke briefly at the committee hearing Friday, called lawfare a form of “political persecution” that could describe HR 41 and other partisan attacks on Liot Hill.
“Lawfare is using the law to damage or delegitimize an opponent,” Soleyn said, saying it is a tool used successfully by authoritarian regimes in Nazi Germany and, more recently, Russia, Turkey and Hungary.
“Lawfare does not preserve civil liberties,” he said. “It’s politically motivated: It’s a weaponization, and at its core it’s a violation of constitutional rights.”
Sweeney said the Legislature has a duty to investigate allegations of unconstitutional behavior by government officials.
“Oversight is not personal. It is constitutional,” he said. “And when concerns are raised, they should be examined openly, not whispered about behind closed doors.”
Liot Hill said after the hearing that the first she knew of Sweeney’s decision to withdraw support for HR 41 was when Lynn made the announcement at 9 a.m., in a hearing room packed with her supporters. Many of them left after Lynn’s announcement, and he later apologized to those who remained for taking up their time.
“We’re glad that you’re here, but we’re sorry that you had to come for essentially a foregone conclusion,” Lynn said.
Liot Hill noted that Sweeney had filed his impeachment resolution last August, before the attorney general’s office had issued its conclusions.
“I’m glad to see that in the end, impeachment is not being used here as a partisan attack,” she said. “Even if it started out as a partisan attack, the right thing has happened.”
Liot Hill said that the investigation and impeachment had cost her money – she had to hire an attorney – and time, although “I don’t think it has slowed me down in the work that I do as an executive councilor.”
But public support helped her to handle the stress of the whole process.
“I have been able to keep a smile on my face, thanks to the incredible support I have received from people across New Hampshire,” she said. “I will be forever grateful.”