_fw.png)
⚖️ HAMPTON TAXPAYERS ASK: CAN ONE REALLY TRUST ANY BRANCH OF NEW HAMPSHIRE STATE GOVERNMENT ?
NEW HAMPSHIRE: WHEN THE COURT WON’T SHOW THE PUBLIC THE RECORDS, WHO IS WATCHING THE WATCHERS?
This latest New Hampshire Supreme Court controversy is another deeply troubling example of the transparency problem confronting citizens who are forced to deal with government institutions.
Two confidential Supreme Court cases involving former Chief Justice Gordon MacDonald and Justices Melissa Countway, Patrick Donovan and Bryan Gould were unsealed Friday — and then resealed hours later. The public was not given an explanation for the sudden reversal.
And this isn't just some technical paperwork issue.
The underlying controversy involves a $50,000 employment-related payout, a subsequent rehiring, a Judicial Conduct Committee investigation, and a Supreme Court public statement that the JCC later said did not accurately portray the circumstances and created a misleading impression. MacDonald subsequently resigned as chief justice and accepted responsibility for violating the Code of Judicial Conduct.
Now the public gets this:
UNSEALED.
PUBLIC ACCESS.
ACCESS CUT OFF.
RESEALED.
NO CLEAR PUBLIC EXPLANATION.
Meanwhile, lawyers are questioning who is actually sitting on Supreme Court panels and whether disclosure is necessary before those justices decide people's cases. Attorney Mark Sisti has said he intends to challenge the composition of the panel hearing his client's appeal.
AND HERE'S THE QUESTION HAMPTON TAXPAYERS SHOULD BE ASKING:
Are we seriously supposed to put our property-tax case in the hands of this system and simply say, "Trust the process"?
Give me a fucking break.
Our Hampton case involves a threshold question of governmental authority — whether the statutory and constitutional prerequisites for the challenged assessment system were actually satisfied. The Rockingham Superior Court dismissed the case without answering that fundamental authority question, and the matter is now before the New Hampshire Supreme Court.
So when citizens see:
LOCAL GOVERNMENT → LIMITED TRANSPARENCY
STATE ADMINISTRATIVE GOVERNMENT → LIMITED TRANSPARENCY
JUDICIAL SYSTEM → SEALED RECORDS → UNSEALED → RESEALED
the obvious question becomes:
WHO HOLDS GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABLE WHEN THE GOVERNMENT IS THE ONE CONTROLLING THE RECORDS, THE PROCESS AND THE COURTROOM?
That does not prove that every New Hampshire official is corrupt, nor does this Supreme Court controversy establish misconduct by every justice involved.
But it does demonstrate why transparency, disclosure, independent review and public accountability matter.
And for Hampton taxpayers, the stakes are enormous.
We aren't asking the Supreme Court to do us a favor.
We're asking the judiciary to answer a legal question about government authority and the lawful exercise of taxing power.
If the government has complied with the law, show the evidence.
If the statutory prerequisites were satisfied, prove it.
If the assessment system is lawful, explain the legal authority.
And if judges have potential conflicts or institutional involvement that could reasonably matter to a litigant, disclose the relevant facts and let the public see the rules being applied.
NEW HAMPSHIRE DOESN'T HAVE A "TRUST US" CLAUSE IN ITS CONSTITUTION.
THE PEOPLE ARE THE GOVERNMENT.
Transparency isn't optional.
Accountability isn't optional.
And justice cannot depend upon citizens simply trusting the people they're asking to scrutinize government power.
**HAMPTON TAXPAYERS ARE WATCHING.
THE RECORD MATTERS.
THE LAW MATTERS.
AND THE PUBLIC HAS A RIGHT TO KNOW.**
Comments