HB1561

HB 1561-FN is unconstitutional, economically harmful, administratively burdensome, and morally wrong. It substitutes suspicion for evidence and collective punishment for individual accountability. New Hampshire can protect national security without abandoning civil rights, academic freedom, and basic fairness. The legislature should reject this bill and instead support policies that uphold constitutional principles, strengthen higher education, and keep our state open to talent, innovation, and opportunity. Vote no on HB 1561.

This is simply blatant racism and the fact it’s even being considered is disgusting. The republicans who wrote this monstrosity should resign in disgrace.

This is a racist bill and any rep who votes for it is a racist. Furthermore, for the rest of your lives your racism will be a matter of public record and easily discovered with an online search. Good luck walking any of it back in 10 years.

There is no need to exclude an entire country from engaging in our school systems. Especially from one of the most populous countries on the planet. Utilizing the definition of “any citizen or agent of the People's Republic of China (PRC) who is not a U.S. citizen” for Chinese national is outrageously inaccurate, and offensive. The Chinese people are not a monolith of thought. Just because a person is Chinese does not mean they are a nationalist for the country. This bill needs to be immediately ceased. Shame on the author and co-sponsors. We literally have Chinese REPUBLICAN politicians in New Hampshire.

As someone with Chinese immigrants in my family I am disgusted by this bill. My family members met their spouses in higher education and barring a nation like China is sinophobic, racist, and disgusting. This flys in the face of "live free or die" it's disgusting and appalling.

My name is Charles Lockwood, and I am a New Hampshire resident. I am writing in opposition to HB 1561-FN, which would prohibit “PRC nationals” from attending New Hampshire higher education institutions and would impose sweeping penalties on students, faculty, staff, and schools. I oppose this bill for five reasons. First, it creates a blanket ban based on nationality and treats people as presumptive threats without individualized evidence. HB 1561-FN does not target specific conduct. It targets a category of people. The bill’s findings assert that PRC nationals who are not U.S. citizens pose a “presumptive risk” and an “existential threat,” then imposes an across-the-board prohibition on enrollment, research participation, employment, and even access to campus facilities beyond public events. This is collective suspicion as state policy. It is not a serious security standard. Second, the bill is vague and overbroad in ways that invite arbitrary enforcement and mistakes. The definition of “PRC national” includes not only “any citizen” of China who is not a U.S. citizen, but also any “agent” with “direct and compromising ties” described through an open-ended list such as “financial links,” “pledged allegiance,” or “acting on orders.” Those terms are not administrable for colleges, admissions staff, or individual faculty. The bill also creates a “presumption of hostile intent” based on a person’s failure to withdraw within 90 days, which is not a reliable indicator of intent and is not due process. Third, HB 1561-FN is likely to conflict with federal law and expose New Hampshire institutions to civil rights and preemption litigation. Civil rights. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination based on race, color, or national origin in programs receiving federal financial assistance. New Hampshire colleges and universities commonly rely on federal student aid and other federal funds. A state mandate that forces institutions to exclude students based on national origin will predictably generate Title VI risk for schools and the state. Federal primacy in immigration and alien regulation. The bill repeatedly pulls state enforcement into federal immigration outcomes (referrals to federal authorities, visa revocation, deportation exposure) while creating state-level prohibitions and penalties tied to noncitizen status. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that significant parts of state immigration schemes can be preempted when they intrude into areas occupied by federal law. Fourth, it imposes substantial, recurring administrative burdens and costs while reducing higher education revenue. The bill requires notarized affidavits from all applicants and current students and requires institutions to file them with the Department of Education within five business days. In practice, this means a new compliance bureaucracy with ongoing notary costs, document retention, and reporting work that is unrelated to education quality or safety. Public testimony will reasonably focus on the bill’s fiscal note. It anticipates material revenue loss and increased compliance costs for USNH and CCSNH. Fifth, the “bounty” provision encourages harassment and weaponized reporting. HB 1561-FN would pay 10 percent of recovered funds to people who provide “actionable information” about alleged violations. That incentive structure invites bad-faith accusations and targeted intimidation on campus. It pushes institutions toward over-enforcement to avoid large fines and criminal exposure for staff. If New Hampshire lawmakers want to address espionage or improper foreign influence, there are narrower, evidence-based approaches that do not discriminate by nationality, such as strengthening research security practices, funding cybersecurity, improving export-control training and compliance, and requiring transparent reporting of certain foreign gifts and contracts using clear, objective thresholds. A blanket educational exclusion policy is not a serious tool for counterintelligence. It is a civil rights and governance problem. For these reasons, I respectfully urge the Committee to recommend Inexpedient to Legislate (ITL) on HB 1561-FN.

I find the entire idea of this bill ridiculous. I am a UNH graduate student who is not Chinese, but has met with many who are. They are not only not "security risks" to our nation but are unbelievable assets to our universities, state, and country. There are no state secrets being discussed in the UNH grad student offices. There is no danger of leaks to the PRC. This bill does nothing for security and only exists to impose a xenophobic atmosphere on the state of New Hampshire. It is shameful.

This bill sets a dangerous precedent and could only escalate tensions with the PRC, a nation that has a radical government but does not mean every Chinese person looking to study in America and specifically New Hampshire are terrorists, communists, or broadly "pose a presumptive risk of hostile action through asymmetric warfare perpetrated by the Chinese communist government against the United States of America, and an existential threat to New Hampshire and its citizenry, including through espionage, intellectual property theft, technology transfer, and chemical, biological and cyber terrorism and warfare via affiliation with higher education institutions." Not only is this bill vilifying an entire population, but it is fear mongering against Chinese people. If it passed, the current students that would need to "voluntarily withdraw" from NH universities will be stranded with no explanation besides "my government hates your government". This treatment of Chinese students and the assumption of their terroristic allegiance to their home country is simple profiling and congers memories of the Jewish limits in universities in the early 1900s, or even worse - the Chinese exclusion act. Worst of all, section V. on page 2 would enable citizens to potentially spy on or provide false information on Chinese people in NH for a monetary benefit - something that also sets a strong and irreversible precedent as well as enables weaponized xenophobia. While tensions are high, it can seem easy to believe you are doing a good thing because you are told China is your "enemy" but the reality is, it is not as simple as this and blanket laws that assume guilt and not presume innocence are how we ended up having Japanese internment camps within the US... In actuality the amount of students that simply want an American education should not be limited, and this bill is a slippery slope to eventually banning any or all foreign students - which is the opposite of what we want in our diverse and equal opportunity schools. Please do not pass this bill, thank you.

This is blatant discrimination. Do not pass this bill - clearly the public is overall not in support of it.

It’s amazing what this state does in order to shoot itself in the foot and avoid any sort of progress. New Hampshire drastically underfunds its own education system and it has members of its own governing body trying to eradicate teaching of the holocaust as well as the genocide of the indigenous communities here, and the horrors that were enacted upon enslaved Africans by the white settlers. With that in mind, the fact that an INTERNATIONAL student would see New Hampshire as a fitting place to continue their education SHOULD be an honor for the state. But this body doesn’t value folks from different walks of life, my goodness this state refers to people originally from Massachusetts like they are the devil incarnate (I know because I moved her from Mass and Kelly Ayotte was more than excited to denigrate her neighboring state that is THRIVING). This bill will subject young Chinese students to the cruelty of Trump’s ICE agents. They have separated children from their parents, arrested American citizens, deported legal residents, and executed Americans in the streets. What do you think it is going to happen to Chinese students being forced to cut their education short and deported, especially since America has propagandized its population to senselessly hate China and its people? This bill is racist, dangerous, and lacks vision for the future.

This is plainly vile and xenophobic. There is no justification for enacting any legislation that looks anything like this in our country, ever.

I strongly oppose this bill! Why single out the country of China and her young people? This is morally indefensible. It makes no economic sense.

While national security is an important and legitimate concern, this legislation raises serious constitutional, legal, and ethical problems. First, HB 1561 appears to conflict with federal law. Immigration policy, visa eligibility, and the regulation of foreign nationals are matters squarely within federal jurisdiction. The U.S. Constitution grants the federal government authority over immigration and foreign affairs. A state-level prohibition targeting a specific nationality risks federal preemption and could expose New Hampshire to costly legal challenges. Second, this bill raises profound Equal Protection concerns. It singles out individuals solely on the basis of national origin. Courts have long held that discrimination based on nationality is subject to the highest level of constitutional scrutiny. A blanket ban that applies regardless of individual conduct, academic field, or security risk is unlikely to survive such scrutiny. Third, HB 1561 would institutionalize discrimination in our public universities. It would require affidavits regarding nationality and create a system of exclusion based not on behavior, but identity. That approach conflicts with core American principles of fairness, due process, and equal opportunity. Beyond legality, this bill would harm New Hampshire’s higher education system. International students contribute significantly to campus life, research innovation, and the state’s economy. A nationality-based ban would undermine our universities’ academic competitiveness and reputation. It could also invite reciprocal treatment of American students and scholars abroad. If there are legitimate national security concerns, those issues are best addressed through existing federal vetting processes, targeted safeguards in sensitive research areas, and coordination with federal authorities, not through broad, identity-based prohibitions enacted at the state level. New Hampshire can uphold both security and constitutional values. HB 1561 does not strike that balance. For these reasons, I urge you to recommend HB 1561 as Inexpedient to Legislate.

the xenophobia is loud in the Republican party, do better and oppose this blasphemous bill!

This is discriminatory, I don't support this.

This is just Xenophobic trash. We need to be bringing in as many talented students as we can or else the brain drain will be catastrophic.

This is extremely discriminatory and assumes malevolence for no reason.

As a parent, a former public school teacher, and as journalist who covers public schools, I am appalled by this legislature's attempt to dismantle our public schools by eliminating local control.

This bill discriminates against one group of people! please vote inexpedient to legislate.

I strongly oppose HB1561 because banning students from state colleges based solely on nationality is discriminatory, unconstitutional, and harmful to New Hampshire’s higher-education system. Our institutions thrive when they are open, inclusive, and focused on academic merit—not political targeting.

This is outright discrimination

This is racist

This bill discriminates against one group of people, even if they are lawfully present in the US. It would prohibit any state institution of higher learning from admitting as a student or hiring any national of the People’s Republic of China who is not a US citizen.

Discrimination against one group of people is not the way to address any legitimate issues.