New Hampshire
NH abortion data collection bill latest flare-up over reproductive rights
On a party-line vote, Republicans in the New Hampshire Senate recently approved a bill that would require abortion providers to share certain data about the procedures they perform with state public health officials.
Forty-six other states already have similar laws in place, making New Hampshire an outlier in the dissemination of abortion statistics.
“I’ve heard debates on the floor many times that we just don’t have the information, we don’t have the data,” Republican Sen. Regina Birdsell said on the Senate floor last week. “Well, guess what: This will do it.”
But for Democrats, the proposal, which was added late in the legislative process and therefore not subject to a public hearing, is the GOP’s latest attempt to chip away at abortion rights and curtail personal freedoms.
“Ever since the Dobbs decision, we have been living in a dystopian horror show with control of pregnant bodies the main plot line,” Democrat Sen. Debra Altschiller said during debate on the measure.
New Hampshire Republicans have tried unsuccessfully numerous times in recent years to require abortion providers to release certain statistics. The latest effort calls for providers to share the date and location of each abortion, the method used, including if a medication was prescribed, as well as share the state of residence of the pregnant patient, and the gestational age of the fetus.
The state Department of Health and Human Services would then publish data annually on abortions in New Hampshire, though the bill doesn’t clarify if the information would be released in an aggregated form, or if the county or even the zip code of the provider would be disclosed.
Democrats argued that level of data shared publicly could put providers at risk for harassment or other targeting; they also questioned how gestational age should be determined by the provider, since the bill lacks any detail.
“This amendment would potentially require a government-forced, potentially medically unnecessary, intrusive trans-vaginal ultrasound,” Sen. Becky Whitley said during a debate last Friday that grew tense at times. “That should send chills down the spine of every woman in the state.”
Senate Majority Leader Sharon Carson, a Republican, rose to her feet, saying she was baffled by the claim.
“I can’t believe what I’m hearing here. I really and truly cannot,” said Carson. “There’s no requirement for any kind of testing here. No ultrasound, no nothing.”
Carson accused Democrats of spreading misinformation about the bill, and in a statement this week reiterated that an ultrasound is not the only way providers could determine age in compliance with the bill.
In practice, providers say ultrasounds are performed before abortions when it makes sense for the patient. But there are other ways to determine gestational age, including using the date of the last menstrual cycle. States including Maine, Massachusetts and Vermont permit abortion providers to estimate the age of the fetus using that information.
A tool for sound policy, or for scoring political points
Abortion providers in New Hampshire say they aren’t opposed to producing and sharing protected, anonymized data, as long as it is used to advance public health policy.
“However, where we need clarity whenever we consider the request to supply abortion data is really we need to know specifically or with some clarity, what the anticipated public health benefit is and how the data may be used,” said Sandi Denoncour, executive director of Lovering Health Center in Greenland.
Abortion rights supporters point to what they see as a history of states using reporting requirements to bog down abortion providers with paperwork. Other states have also required providers to collect invasive or what they see as irrelevant information about the patient, including their history of contraceptive use.
“They’re not really being used for public health purposes,” said Rachel Jones, a researcher with the Guttmacher Institute, one of the country’s leading research institutions on abortion. “They’re being used to further stigmatize abortion and increase the burden on the facilities that provide this care.”
While New Hampshire, along with California, Maryland and New Jersey are the only states that don’t have reporting mandates, Guttmacher’s website does maintain abortion statistics for procedures performed in New Hampshire.
In 2023, Guttmacher estimates there were 2,400 abortions performed in the state.
That data is based on voluntary reporting by local clinics, including Lovering Health Center and Planned Parenthood of Northern New England.
Those clinics willingly share aggregate abortion numbers, they said, because they trust Guttmacher to use the data for research purposes.
After clearing the state Senate on a party line vote, the bill mandating reporting statistics now heads to the New Hampshire House, where it will get a full public hearing and could be amended.
Gov. Chris Sununu has previously said he supports the state collecting data.
These articles are being shared by partners in The Granite State News Collaborative. For more information visit collaborativenh.org.
Editor’s note: State Sen. Debra Altschiller, D-Stratham, is the wife of Howard Altschiller, Seacoast Media Group’s executive editor.
New Hampshire
NH Lottery Mega Millions, Lucky For Life winning numbers for Dec. 23, 2025
The New Hampshire Lottery offers several draw games for those aiming to win big. Here’s a look at Tuesday, Dec. 23, 2025 results for each game:
Winning Mega Millions numbers from Dec. 23 drawing
15-37-38-41-64, Mega Ball: 21
Check Mega Millions payouts and previous drawings here.
Winning Lucky For Life numbers from Dec. 23 drawing
02-04-12-37-42, Lucky Ball: 10
Check Lucky For Life payouts and previous drawings here.
Winning Pick 3 numbers from Dec. 23 drawing
Day: 1-9-3
Evening: 0-1-6
Check Pick 3 payouts and previous drawings here.
Winning Pick 4 numbers from Dec. 23 drawing
Day: 4-9-8-7
Evening: 6-4-8-4
Check Pick 4 payouts and previous drawings here.
Winning Gimme 5 numbers from Dec. 23 drawing
21-25-31-36-39
Check Gimme 5 payouts and previous drawings here.
Feeling lucky? Explore the latest lottery news & results
When are the New Hampshire Lottery drawings held?
- Powerball: 10:59 p.m. Monday, Wednesday, and Saturday.
- Pick 3, 4: 1:10 p.m. and 6:55 p.m. daily.
- Mega Millions: 11:00 p.m. Tuesday and Friday.
- Megabucks Plus: 7:59 p.m. Monday, Wednesday and Saturday.
- Lucky for Life: 10:38 p.m. daily.
- Gimme 5: 6:55 p.m. Monday through Friday.
Winning lottery numbers are sponsored by Jackpocket, the official digital lottery courier of the USA TODAY Network.
Where can you buy lottery tickets?
Tickets can be purchased in person at gas stations, convenience stores and grocery stores. Some airport terminals may also sell lottery tickets.
You can also order tickets online through Jackpocket, the official digital lottery courier of the USA TODAY Network, in these U.S. states and territories: Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Idaho, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Puerto Rico, Washington D.C., and West Virginia. The Jackpocket app allows you to pick your lottery game and numbers, place your order, see your ticket and collect your winnings all using your phone or home computer.
Jackpocket is the official digital lottery courier of the USA TODAY Network. Gannett may earn revenue for audience referrals to Jackpocket services. GAMBLING PROBLEM? CALL 1-800-GAMBLER, Call 877-8-HOPENY/text HOPENY (467369) (NY). 18+ (19+ in NE, 21+ in AZ). Physically present where Jackpocket operates. Jackpocket is not affiliated with any State Lottery. Eligibility Restrictions apply. Void where prohibited. Terms: jackpocket.com/tos.
This results page was generated automatically using information from TinBu and a template written and reviewed by a New Hampshire managing editor. You can send feedback using this form.
New Hampshire
N.H. city’s refusal to fly ‘Save Women’s Sports’ and ‘An Appeal to Heaven’ flags is unconstitutional, appeals court rules – The Boston Globe
A federal appeals court has ruled officials in Nashua, N.H., engaged in unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination when they denied requests to fly certain politically charged flags, while allowing others, on the city’s “citizen flag pole.”
Bethany and Stephen Scaer, whose requests to hoist banners with the slogans “Save Women’s Sports” and “An Appeal to Heaven” were rejected, teamed up with the Institute for Free Speech and filed a lawsuit in 2024 alleging their First Amendment rights were violated.
The trial court in New Hampshire initially concluded the Scaers hadn’t demonstrated a likelihood that their case would succeed, since the flags approved for display at City Hall constitute government speech. But three judges on the First Circuit Court of Appeals reversed that decision Monday, finding that the flagpole in question had actually been a venue for private speech all along.
The case relates to one Boston lost in 2022, when the US Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the city had unconstitutionally rejected an application to fly a Christian flag.
Even though Nashua sought to clarify its policy in response to that 2022 precedent, the city’s process for deciding which flags from the general public would be allowed still didn’t convert private speech into government speech, according to the First Circuit ruling.
“Nashua was doing no more than simply approving that private speech with which it agreed,” Judge Sandra L. Lynch wrote in the ruling, joined by judges Gustavo A. Gelpí and Jeffrey R. Howard.
In a statement, Beth Scaer said the ruling offers a sense of vindication.
“No one should have to face government censorship for expressing their beliefs,” she said. “We’re thrilled with this victory for free speech rights throughout New England.”
Nathan Ristuccia, an attorney with the Institute for Free Speech who argued the case on appeal, said his team is delighted by the ruling.
“As the First Circuit recognized, governments cannot get away with censorship by labeling that censorship ‘government speech,’” Ristuccia said.
Before the lawsuit was filed, Nashua Mayor James W. Donchess said the city declined to fly the “Save Women’s Sports” flag because officials interpreted it as implying transgender people should face discrimination.
The Scaers, who regularly demonstrate against gender-affirming medical interventions for minors and against inclusion of transgender athletes in women’s and girls’ sports, rejected the notion that their messaging is transphobic.
As for the “Appeal to Heaven” flag, which features a pine tree, Donchess said city officials want to avoid endorsing the additional meaning it has taken on in recent years.
The banner emerged during the American Revolution, with a nod to the Pine Tree Riot in New Hampshire, an act of American resistance that preceded the Boston Tea Party. More recently, the flag has also been used by Christian nationalists, including some who carried it to the US Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, when a violent mob delayed the certification of President Trump’s 2020 electoral defeat.
In her application to raise the “Appeal to Heaven” flag, Beth Scaer said she wanted to honor the soldiers from Nashua who fought and died at the Battle of Bunker Hill in 1775. She and her husband said their request has nothing to do with the Capitol riot.
Nashua has also declined to fly several other flags since the 2022 policy update, including a “pro-life” flag and a Palestinian flag, according to the lawsuit.
Nashua’s attorney, Steven A. Bolton, said on Tuesday that the city has not yet determined whether to file an appeal. He noted that the appellate ruling calls for the trial court to grant interim declaratory relief while the case proceeds.
Bolton said the city has stopped inviting community members to fly their own flags.
“A new policy was adopted more than a year ago, and we no longer use the term ‘citizen’s flag pole,’” he said. “We no longer accept applications from other parties to fly flags on any of the poles on the City Hall grounds.”
Steven Porter can be reached at steven.porter@globe.com. Follow him @reporterporter.
New Hampshire
Nashua man dies after car crash and fire on Route 101 in Candia, investigation ongoing
CANDIA, NH (WGME) – Early Monday morning, a Nashua man died following a crash on Route 101 eastbound in Candia, New Hampshire.
Joseph H. Lavoie, 58, of Nashua, had been driving along Route 101 eastbound near Exit 3 when he lost control of his car, resulting in a drift off the right side of the highway before striking the cement bridge at the Old Candia Road overpass.
State troopers arrived at the scene to find Lavoie’s car on fire, though several passing drivers had helped to pull Lavoie out of his car. The fire was quickly extinguished.
Lavoie was taken to the hospital where he later died from his injuries.
JOIN THE CONVERSATION (1)
The crash remains under investigation. Anyone with information that may assist the investigation is asked to contact Trooper Kevin LeDoux via email at Kevin.P.LeDeoux@dos.nh.gov.
-
Iowa1 week agoAddy Brown motivated to step up in Audi Crooks’ absence vs. UNI
-
Maine1 week agoElementary-aged student killed in school bus crash in southern Maine
-
Maryland1 week agoFrigid temperatures to start the week in Maryland
-
New Mexico1 week agoFamily clarifies why they believe missing New Mexico man is dead
-
South Dakota1 week agoNature: Snow in South Dakota
-
Detroit, MI1 week ago‘Love being a pedo’: Metro Detroit doctor, attorney, therapist accused in web of child porn chats
-
Health1 week ago‘Aggressive’ new flu variant sweeps globe as doctors warn of severe symptoms
-
Maine1 week agoFamily in Maine host food pantry for deer | Hand Off