Rep. Ellen Read Speeding Charges: Legislative Privilege Claim Rejected

New Hampshire state Representative Ellen Read, a Democrat from Newmarket, is facing two speeding citations after being clocked at 107 mph and 92 mph on Interstate 93. Her defense: a provision of the state constitution adopted in 1784 that she says shields lawmakers from arrest while traveling to or from the General Court. The New Hampshire Supreme Court declined to hear her appeal in June 2025, leaving the lower court rulings intact. The case raises questions about the limits of legislative immunity and how a centuries-old clause applies to modern traffic enforcement.

The Two Stops

On December 2, 2024, a Rockingham County deputy clocked Read's Toyota Yaris at 107 mph in a 65 mph zone on I-93 in Windham. According to Major Christopher Bashaw of the Rockingham County Sheriff's Office, Read told the deputy she was on her way from serving at the State House and heading to her workplace in Woburn, Massachusetts. She was driving away from the capital.

The second stop occurred on the morning of June 5, 2025, when a different deputy recorded her at 92 mph in a 65 mph zone on I-93 southbound in Londonderry. In both cases, law enforcement let her go without an arrest.

The Legislative Privilege Argument

Read argued that the stops violated Part Two, Article 21 of the New Hampshire Constitution, which states: “No member of the house of representatives, or senate shall be arrested, or held to bail, on mesne process, during his going to, returning from, or attendance upon, the court.” The “court” refers to the New Hampshire General Court, the formal name for the state legislature.

Her legal team contended that because she was traveling to or from a legislative session, the traffic stops were unconstitutional and the evidence obtained should be suppressed. In court filings, her counsel compared her situation to that of a police officer or emergency medical technician who might exceed the speed limit while responding to an urgent call, though they did not specify what circumstances warranted her speed.

Court Outcomes

In the first case, Read was found guilty of negligent driving. She was fined $1,240 and given a deferred sentence with the threat of license suspension if another moving violation occurred within two years. A hearing on that deferred punishment is set for August 12, 2025, to consider the impact of her second speeding ticket.

Read appealed the first case, but the New Hampshire Supreme Court declined to hear her appeal in June 2025. The court's refusal to hear the case is not a ruling on the merits of her legislative privilege claim, but it leaves the lower court's decision standing.

The second speeding charge awaits a bench trial after the presiding judge recused himself in April 2025. No new trial date has been set.

Broader Implications for Traffic Law and Legislative Immunity

Read is not the first lawmaker to attempt this defense. The New Hampshire Constitution's Article 21 was designed to prevent the executive branch from arresting legislators to prevent them from attending sessions—a practice common in colonial times. The provision has been invoked sporadically over the years, but courts have consistently rejected its application to routine traffic stops.

Legal experts note that the clause uses the term “arrested, or held to bail,” which historically referred to criminal detention, not a traffic citation. Modern traffic stops are generally considered investigative detentions, not arrests, and courts have distinguished between the two. The New Hampshire Supreme Court's decision not to hear Read's appeal suggests the justices saw no basis to expand the privilege to cover speeding tickets.

The case also highlights a practical tension: if legislative privilege applied to every trip to or from the State House, lawmakers could theoretically drive at any speed without consequence as long as they were on legislative business. That interpretation would create a two-tiered traffic enforcement system—one for legislators and one for everyone else.

What Comes Next

Read is running for reelection. The August 12 hearing will determine whether the deferred sentence from her first case is activated due to the second citation. If the judge finds she violated the terms of her deferred sentence, she could face license suspension. The second case remains in limbo pending a new judge assignment and bench trial.

For now, the legislative privilege defense has not succeeded in court. The New Hampshire Supreme Court's refusal to hear the appeal signals that the state's highest court sees no immediate need to revisit the scope of Article 21. Whether Read's case prompts legislative clarification or a constitutional amendment remains to be seen.

For more on how technology intersects with legal and governmental processes, see our analysis of regulatory compensation frameworks and high-profile legal battles involving government officials.