CONCORD, NH — The House failed to repeal the state’s divisive concepts law, but approved a bill that would establish a process to address parents’ concerns about materials in school libraries.
The House also passed a bill requiring the university and community college systems to protect the free speech and freedom to associate for all organizations on campuses and to provide funding for those organizations.
Find out what’s happening in Across New Hampshirewith free, real-time updates from Patch.
Divisive Concepts
House Bill 1162 would repeal the state’s law that prohibits teaching that any group is inherently racist, sexist or oppressive, or that would indicate any group is inferior, or superior to any other.
Advertisement
The law was included in the biennial budget passed by the legislature in 2021 and is currently being litigated in the federal court system.
Find out what’s happening in Across New Hampshirewith free, real-time updates from Patch.
Rep. Alicia Lekas, R-Hudson, said the law is working because she no longer hears from friends that their child was made to feel they are racists or sexists.
But she said a new campaign has begun that is just as divisive to make blacks feel like they need their white protectors to allow them to move forward.
After the law was passed the Department of Education placed a form on its website for parents to report possible violations of the law and the Moms for Liberty offered a bounty on the first teacher charged under the new law.
The bill’s prime sponsor, Rep. Peter Petrigno, D-Milford, called the law insulting to teachers and one of the reasons teachers are leaving the profession due to the politicalization of education.
Advertisement
He said teachers need to be able to teach about the Nazis of Germany and the parallels to the Nazis today, and the Klu Klux Klan and today’s white supremacists.
“Teachers are not being allowed to connect the dots,” Petrigno said. “New Hampshire is better than this. We are better than this.”The bill was indefinitely postponed on a 192-183 vote, which means the subject cannot be brought up again this session.
Freedom To Read
The House defeated an attempt to indefinitely postpone House Bill 1311, which has the state Board of Education require every school district to have a policy to determine if material parents object to in school libraries should be removed.
The bill would prohibit removal of books only because of race, sexual orientation, religion or political viewpoint, and leaves the decision up to the local school board.
The bill’s prime sponsor, Rep. David Paige, D-Conway, said the bill attempts to balance the rights of parents, local control and due process rights.
Advertisement
He said the bill seeks to remove censorship in the marketplace of ideas, while opening up the world to students through literature.
“This is a bipartisan, common sense bill,” Paige said, “with a balanced approach to uphold all of these shared goals.”But opponents said the bill would cement obscene material into school libraries.
Rep. Arlene Quaratiello, R-Atkinson, argued the bill would make it impossible to remove material parents object to that is educationally unsuitable or pervasively vulgar from school libraries.
She used a book on suicide methods for a safe and peaceful death as an example of a “very misguided public school librarian’s” selection, that should be off limits for kids.
The House voted down the attempt to kill the bill for the rest of the session, on a 190-185 vote before approving the bill 194-180. The bill now goes to the Senate.
Advertisement
Free Speech
The House approved House Bill 1305, which is similar to a bill that was tabled last session.
Supporters of the bill said while the university and community college systems receive generally high marks for the policies they established on free speech and organizations, there are certain groups that have been targeted, particularly conservative and religious, that are not treated the same as other groups.
The bill’s prime sponsor, Rep. Daniel Popovici-Muller, R-Windham, said free speech and free association are constitutional rights no matter how harmful people believe it is.
Many of the major rights people have today were generated by very unpopular speech years ago, he said. “All we are asking is the same treatment for safe spaces and the minimal student activities fees (other organizations receive,) he said.
You are not legally required to date anybody who asks you out, he said.
Advertisement
Rep. Valerie McDonnell, R-Salem, said the organizations that host events lose their right to hold other events because of hecklers and that is unfair and unAmerican.
She said current policy will leave the higher education systems subject to very expensive lawsuits. “Free speech zones should not be in the back corner of a parking lot,” she said.
But Rep. David Luneau, D-Hopkinton, said the bill is not needed and unnecessarily overreaches far beyond freedom of speech and instead requires taxpayer money to recognize student organizations that discriminate based on race, gender identification, religion and political ideology.
Under the bill, the university would be required to fund hate groups and would fuel a violent environment on college campuses, Luneau said.
The bill passed on a 206-169 vote and now goes to the Senate.
Advertisement
Garry Rayno may be reached at garry.rayno@yahoo.com.
This story was originally published by InDepth NH.
We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here
WILTON, N.H. (WHDH) – A woman died in a Wilton, New Hampshire, house fire Wednesday morning, according to the New Hampshire State Fire Marshal’s Office.
At 9:08 a.m., Wilton firefighters responded to Burns Hill Road after a caller said their home was filling up with smoke. When they arrived, a single-family home was on fire and they found out two people were still inside on the second floor.
A man and a woman were both taken out of the house by firefighters and taken to Elliott Hospital. The woman was pronounced dead and the man is in serious condition.
Officials have not released the name of the victim at this time.
Advertisement
At this time, investigators are looking into the cause of the fire and are trying to determine if a power outage in the area played a factor. The fire is not currently considered suspicious.
(Copyright (c) 2025 Sunbeam Television. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.)
Join our Newsletter for the latest news right to your inbox
Diane Durgin, 67, is accused of shooting at a Black man who inadvertently drove to her property after a prearranged truck part sale, prosecutors said.
A New Hampshire woman is accused of violating the state’s Civil Rights Act four times after she allegedly shot at a man because he was Black, prosecutors said.
Diane Durgin, 67, of Weare, N.H. could face up to a $5,000 fine for each violation she is found to have committed, the office of New Hampshire Attorney General John Formella said in a press release Tuesday.
Advertisement
Durgin is also charged with criminal threatening against a person with a deadly weapon and attempted first degree assault with a deadly weapon, Michael Garrity, a media representative for the New Hampshire Attorney General, said in an emailed statement to Boston.com.
Durgin had a final pre-trial conference last week, Garrity said.
In a civil complaint filed Tuesday, Durgin is accused of threatening physical force against the victim, the AG said. Prosecutors asked the court to issue a preliminary injunction barring Durgin from repeating her alleged behavior and from contacting the victim and his family.
During the morning hours of Oct. 20, 2024, the victim claims, he “mistakenly” drove to Durgin’s home after a prearranged purchase of a truck part with a seller online, prosecutors wrote as part of their request for an injunction.
When the man — whom prosecutors identified in court documents as X.G. — arrived, Durgin allegedly stepped out of her home and approached his car with a gun “holstered by her waist,” prosecutors wrote.
Advertisement
Upon noticing that X.G. was Black, Durgin allegedly “removed her gun and pointed it at X.G.,” prosecutors said in the injunction request.
While X.G. explained that he was lost, Durgin called the victim a “Black mother[expletive],” and threatened to “kill him,” prosecutors allege.
As the victim attempted to drive away, Durgin allegedly took her gun and fired two shots at the fleeing man’s car, missing both times, the AG’s office said.
While on the phone with a dispatcher, Durgin allegedly said she shot the man’s car because the victim is Black, the AG said.
“The guy is Black. And he, he…he says he’s meeting someone here and I think he’s coming here to steal,” Durgin allegedly said.
Advertisement
Police located X.G. and brought him to the Weare Police Department, stopping along the way at the correct seller’s home to complete the truck part purchase, prosecutors wrote in court documents.
To prove a violation of the New Hampshire Civil Rights Act, the AG must show that Durgin “interfered or attempted to interfere with the rights of the victim to engage in lawful activities by threatening to engage in or actually engage in physical force or violence, when such actual or threatening conduct was motivated by race, color, religion, national origin, ancestry, sexual orientation, sex, gender identity, or disability,” prosecutors said.
Sign up for the Today newsletter
Get everything you need to know to start your day, delivered right to your inbox every morning.
