221 erties Union of New Hampshire, Concord, NH, for Leon H. Rideout. Stephen G. Labonte, Anne M. Edwards, NH Attorney General’s Office, Concord, NH, for William M. Gardner. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER PAUL BARBADORO, District Judge. New Hampshire recently adopted a law that makes it unlawful for voters to take and disclose digital or photographic copies of their completed ballots in an effort to let others know how they have voted. Three voters, who are under investigation because they posted images of their ballots on social media sites, have challenged the new law on First Amendment grounds. As I explain in this Memorandum and Order, the new law is invalid because it is a content-based restriction on speech that cannot survive strict scrutiny. I. BACKGROUND It has been unlawful since at least 1979 for a New Hampshire voter to show his ballot to someone else with an intention to disclose how he plans to vote. See N.H.Rev.Stat. Ann. § 659:35, I (2008). In 2014, the legislature amended section 659:35, I of the New Hampshire Revised Statutes (“RSA 659:35, I”) to provide that: No voter shall allow his or her ballot to be seen by any person with the intention of letting it be known how he or she is about to vote or how he or she has voted except as provided in RSA 659:2o.1 This prohibition shall include taking a digital image or photograph of his or her marked ballot and distributing or sharing the image via social media or by any other means. 1. RSA 659:20 allows a voter who needs assistance marking his or her ballot to receive assistance. N.H.Rev.Stat. Ann. § 659:20. 2. The plaintiffs filed a legislative history as Exhibit G to the Declaration of Gilíes Bisson- N.H.Rev.Stat. Ann. § 659:35,1 (Supp.2014) (emphasis added to identify the modifications that became effective September 1, 2014). At the same time, the legislature reduced the penalty for a violation of RSA 659:35, I from a misdemeanor to a violation. 2014 N.H. Legis. Serv. 80 (codified as amended at N.H.Rev.Stat. Ann. § 659:35, IV). Thus, anyone who violates the new law faces a possible fine of up to $1,000 for each violation. N.H.Rev.Stat. Ann. § 651:2, IV(a) (establishing maximum penalty for a violation). A. Legislative History State Representative Timothy Horrigan introduced a bill to amend RSA 659:35, I on January 3, 2013. See Exhibit G to the Declaration of Gilíes Bissonnette, Esq. in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment (“Legislative History”) at 000048, 000140, Rideout v. Gardner, No. 14-cv-489-PB (filed Mar. 27, 2015).2 As initially proposed, the bill simply stated that “[n]o voter shall take a photograph or a digital image of his or her marked ballot.” Id. at 000144. In testimony in favor of the bill, Representative Horrigan explained why he was proposing his amendment: Last fall, in late October 2012, one of the workers' at my local Democratic campaign office received her absentee ballot. After she filled it out, she was about to have a photo of her ballot taken to be posted to her social media accounts. We began to worry taking such a photo might be a violation of federal and state election laws. It turns out that this may not necessarily have been a violation of the letter of the law—but it would definitely be a violation of the spirit of RSA nette, Esq. in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment. The exhibit is not available electronically because it exceeds the size allowed by ECF, The parties have agreed to the exhibit’s authenticity by stipulation. See Doc. No. 19-7.