New Hampshire state Rep. Ellen Read, a Democrat representing Newmarket, is asking the courts to dismiss two speeding-related cases by arguing that a provision of the state constitution protects lawmakers from being stopped by police while traveling to and from legislative sessions.
Read contends the traffic stops violated a provision of the New Hampshire Constitution dating to 1784 that she says grants legislators certain protections while traveling to and from legislative sessions.
The first incident occurred on December 2, 2024, when authorities alleged Read was driving 107 mph in a 65 mph zone on Interstate 93 in Windham.
She was later stopped again in June 2025 after deputies accused her of driving 92 mph in a 65 mph zone in Londonderry.
According to court filings, Read told deputies during both encounters that she was returning from legislative duties and was driving a vehicle displaying a New Hampshire state representative license plate.
At the center of Read’s legal challenge is Part II, Article 21 of the New Hampshire Constitution, which states that no member of the House or Senate “shall be arrested, or held to bail” while traveling to, attending, or returning from the General Court.
Read argues the constitutional language prohibited deputies from stopping or detaining her while traveling to or from legislative business.
Court filings submitted on her behalf state that she was “unlawfully detained/seized/arrested” and ask that evidence obtained during the traffic stops be suppressed and the charges dismissed, according to Trending Politics.
Read has maintained that her argument is not an attempt to place lawmakers above the law or avoid prosecution.
She told Fox News that “the plain reading of the Constitution says that legislators cannot be stopped on their way to or from their duties,” while adding that the provision “says nothing of being ticketed or arrested at the end of the commute, and nothing about prosecution.”
She has also argued the constitutional language was intended to prevent officials from delaying lawmakers or interfering with legislative business rather than granting immunity from criminal liability.
Her legal filings also compare lawmakers traveling to and from legislative duties to police officers or emergency medical technicians who may exceed the speed limit while performing official responsibilities.
However, court records do not identify any emergency that required Read to drive at the speeds alleged by authorities.
A judge rejected the legislative privilege argument in the first case, and Read was found guilty of negligent driving in August 2025.
She was fined $1,240, with half the fine deferred, and allowed to keep her license if she completes a safe-driving course, avoids additional moving violations for two years, and complies with other conditions.
Read later asked the New Hampshire Supreme Court to consider the constitutional issue before her second speeding case proceeded, but the court declined to hear the appeal at that stage, allowing her to raise the issue again through a future appeal.
She has since said she accepted the negligent driving conviction in the first case to bring it to a close and chose not to pursue an appeal on the constitutional question.
Read disputed the 100-plus mph allegation, citing the condition of her 2009 Toyota Yaris, which she said has accumulated more than 440,000 miles, as a reason to question the reported speed.
She also disputed how her speed was determined and raised concerns about the absence of body-camera footage from the traffic stop.
The constitutional argument has drawn criticism from some legal observers.
The Concerd Monitor reported that former New Hampshire Supreme Court Chief Justice Bob Lynn, now a Republican state representative, said the constitutional provision exists to ensure lawmakers can perform their legislative duties but does not prevent them from being prosecuted for alleged violations of the law.
He said stopping a lawmaker for a traffic violation and later pursuing charges was a reasonable application of the law.
Read, meanwhile, has said the scrutiny surrounding the cases is politically motivated and stems from her effectiveness as a legislator.
