Impeachment is for serious misconduct
HR41
House · 2026 sessionRepublicanKilled in HouseImpeachment probe of Karen Liot Hill
AIDirects the house of representatives to investigate whether grounds exist to impeach Executive Councilor Karen Liot Hill, authorizing an investigating committee to subpoena testimony and documents.
instructing the house of representatives to investigate whether grounds exist to impeach Executive Councilor Karen Liot Hill.
Status
Killed in the House — Inexpedient to Legislate · March 11, 2026- ✓Introduced
- ✕House
- Adopted
Division of testimony
2,046 submissionsHatched = form letter · 10 of 2,046 written submissions (0%) came from organized campaigns
Argument digest · AI-generated
from 415 of 878 written submissionsHR41 would direct the House to investigate whether grounds exist to impeach Executive Councilor Karen Liot Hill, stemming from her use of a state email account to assist a constituent and a law firm regarding SB 287's voter ID requirements. The overwhelming majority of submitters oppose the resolution, arguing the Attorney General already cleared her and that the effort is a partisan attempt to remove the Executive Council's only Democrat; a small number of submitters support further scrutiny of her conduct or take a neutral position on the proper standard for impeachment.
- Broader conduct and past ethics issues warrant scrutinySupport1 of 415 reviewed
One submission argues the inquiry should not be limited to the emails at issue, pointing to past campaign-finance allegations against Liot Hill as further reason to examine her conduct.
- AG already investigated and found no wrongdoingOppose207 of 415 reviewed
Submitters argue the New Hampshire Attorney General's office already investigated the underlying emails and concluded they did not constitute electioneering or a misuse of position, so no legal basis remains for impeachment proceedings.
“The office stated plainly: "This Office cannot conclude that the e-mails constituted a misuse of position or otherwise violated the executive branch ethics code. This matter is closed."”
— Sue Vatnick, Madison · #642978 — read full submission →
“HR41 asks this body to weaponize impeachment after the Attorney General has already determined that no wrongdoing occurred. That should alarm every legislator, regardless of party.”
— Timothy Swaan, N. Haverhill · #645599 — read full submission →
- Partisan attack on the Council's only DemocratOppose117 of 415 reviewed · 10 via form letter
Submitters describe HR41 as a nakedly partisan effort to remove the sole Democrat on the Executive Council, characterizing it as an attack on the votes and voice of her constituents rather than a good-faith accountability measure.
- Waste of taxpayer time and moneyOppose106 of 415 reviewed
Submitters argue that pursuing impeachment after the matter is already closed wastes legislative time and taxpayer resources that could go toward pressing issues like housing, health care, and education funding.
“Why are you wasting taxpayer money on these kinds of things when you could be using the time to solve real problems. Housing, food prices, our health care costs, and the low, low funding of our public schools are our problems.”
— S Stephanie, Rollinsford · #645909 — read full submission →
“Our state has pressing work to do — maintaining critical infrastructure, protecting public health and human rights, expanding economic opportunity, and ensuring government serves all Granite Staters. Pursuing impeachment distracts from those urgent priorities”
— David Luneau, Hopkinton · #652185 — read full submission →
- Chilling effect on free speech and dissentOppose42 of 415 reviewed
Submitters contend the resolution amounts to intimidation of an elected official for expressing views the majority disagrees with, threatening the ability of officials to advocate for constituents without fear of retaliation.
“using it to target an elected official after the Attorney General has cleared the conduct creates a chilling effect on lawful advocacy and dissent. This is not illegal intimidation, but it is institutional intimidation”
— Timothy Swaan, N. Haverhill · #645599 — read full submission →
“This impeachment effort is not based on wrongdoing. It is because some people disagree with what Councilor Hill has to say, and they are using the threat of impeachment to try to silence and intimidate her.”
— Karen Burnett-Kurie, Wolfeboro · #645935 — read full submission →
- Voters, not the legislature, should decide her fateOppose30 of 415 reviewed
Submitters argue that if constituents are unhappy with Councilor Liot Hill's conduct, the appropriate remedy is to vote her out in the next election rather than have the legislature remove her through impeachment.
“In New Hampshire, if people don’t like what an elected official is saying, it’s up to the voters to decide whether they should be returned to office.”
— Valerie Stinson, Enfield · #650701 — read full submission →
“We elected Karen Liot in the most gerrymandered district in the state. Voters deserve to be represented by the Executive Councilor we elected.”
— Suzanne Butcher, Keene · #651372 — read full submission →
- Her conduct was normal constituent serviceOppose19 of 415 reviewed
Submitters note that the AG's review found this kind of email advocacy typical of elected officials generally, citing examples of Republican officials using official email similarly without facing impeachment threats.
“AG did an investigation and cleared liot-Hill of wrongdoing in December. They even pointed out that this type of work is typical for elected officials and gave examples of Republicans who have used their official emails to advocate for their constituents.”
— Valerie Stinson, Enfield · #650701 — read full submission →
“The state's Attorney General has investigated this perceived infraction and found that Ms Liot-Hill had done nothing illegal and, in fact, her actions were typical constituent services.”
— Michael Frank, Spofford · #644463 — read full submission →
- Personal character references for Liot HillOppose11 of 415 reviewed
Some submitters cite personal or professional experience with Councilor Liot Hill to vouch for her integrity, dedication, and effectiveness, arguing this record is inconsistent with grounds for impeachment.
“I have known Ms. Hill for several years, and have witnessed her commitment to good, clean, effective government: local, regional, state, and federal.”
— Roberta Hambleton, Lebanon · #652214 — read full submission →
“I found her to be passionate about her job (e.g. spending her Saturday traveling from her home district to Laconia), articulate, and an excellent role model for anyone who desires to serve in state government.”
— Martha Kruse, Laconia · #652203 — read full submission →
- Conduct doesn't meet the constitutional impeachment standardOppose8 of 415 reviewed
Submitters point to Article 63 of the New Hampshire Constitution, arguing councilors may only be impeached for bribery, corruption, malpractice, or maladministration, none of which is present here.
“Article 63 of the NH Constitution states, "members of the Council may be impeached...for bribery, corruption, malpractice, or maladministration." Councillor Liot-Hill was fully investigated and determined not guilty of any of these crimes”
— Susan Connolly, Bristol · #643684 — read full submission →
“There is no evidence of bribery, corruption, malpractice, or maladministration here and you know it. This is political theater and an attack, and it’s wrong.”
— Haley Levesque, Nashua · #652293 — read full submission →
- Impeachment should be reserved for the most egregious conductNeutral1 of 415 reviewed
One submission takes a neutral position, arguing impeachment is meant only for conduct so egregious it cannot wait for the next election, and that the choice of representation should otherwise be left to local voters.
Generated by claude-sonnet-5 (claude code agent) on Jul 20, 2026. Quotes are verbatim excerpts, verified against the cited submission before publication. Summaries are AI interpretation of the record, not part of it.
Form-letter campaigns
10 of 878 written submissions (1%)10 submissions match a shared template; 868 are individually written.
- Defend Council Member Against ImpeachmentOppose10 submissions on this bill
The letter argues that impeachment efforts against the councilor lack legal basis and represent a partisan attack on voters' voices.
The letter · submitted 10 times Karen Liot Hill is our duly elected Executive Councilor and the only Democrat on the Council. Efforts to impeach her are an attack on the power of our voice as voters. There is no legal basis for this impeachment effort, the second (nakedly partisan) impeachment attempt against her.
Detected by text-similarity clustering; campaign names are AI-generated.
Karen Liot Hill is a qualified and contributing member of the Executive Council and there are no credible grounds for this action. She brings an educated and balanced viewpoint of the issues important to the citizens of the State of New Hampshire.
I oppose the impeachment of the representative Karen Hill for something she is doing to help people with her emails. This is not misconduct.
Karen Liot Hill is an honest and upstanding member of our government and has already been cleared of wrongdoing by the Attorny General. This hearing is farscial and nothing but a power grab by Hill's political opponents. She is innocent.
I oppose the bill .
“Whereas the New Hampshire Constitution provides that the House of Representatives is the grand inquest of the state and all impeachments made by it shall be heard and tried by the Senate and further provides the members of the executive council may be impeached by the house and tried by the Senate for bribery, corruption, malpractice or maladministration.” There is no evidence of bribery, corruption, malpractice, or maladministration here and you know it. This is political theater and an attack, and it’s wrong. If we’re ever going to work together in this state, we need to stop this childish nonsense. It’s a waste of time and an affront to personal freedom, which the bill sponsor supposedly believes in. How did she leverage her authority and resources of her authority?
I OPPOSE this bill and the attempt to impeach Karen Hill. It’s a disgusting attempt on the part of republicans to wrestle more control of the NH govt. I WHOLEHEARTEDLY oppose this bill and this disgusting behavior.
I strongly oppose this bill. I am a constituent of Karen Liot Hill, and this impeachment endeavor is an effort to disenfranchise me and the majority of her other Grafton County constituents. The fact that the (Republican) New Hampshire Attorney General determined in December she did not commit any wrongdoing in the issue she is being attacked about - that should be enough for the Judiciary Committee to deem this bill ITL. In my dealings with the one previous Exec Councilor I had the need to contact (Ray Burton, decades ago), I am well aware that one of the main things executive councilors do is to understand the needs of their constituents and be responsive. That is exactly what Karen Liot Hill has been doing, and she does it very well. She’s also very well equipped experientially to manage and evaluate complicated financial management issues. And she has integrity - one thing which our government needs currently. Btw, I read the bill in full, and I also reread the state constitution this morning. Please ITL this bill.
Executive Counselor Hill has been cleared of wrongdoing doing by the Attorney General’s office. Is this a Republican witch hunt? Shame on the sponsors of this ridiculous waste of time and energy.
An absolute waste of time.
Start working together for the people of New Hampshire and stop with partisan games that hurt us all.
Cleared means Cleared or do you have your own dictionary now!
I strongly oppose this bill.
Karen was cleared of this charge several months ago and the decision said that the case is closed. This appears to be a case of something that is not unusual to have done and that she is being singled out as the only Democrat on the Executive Council. She is a good public servant. I resent the fact that my district's Executive Counselor is being singled out and continues to be harassed.
The attorney general cleared her already and this is a waste of time and resources.
How is connecting constituents with resources an impeachable offense? That’s literally part of all of your job descriptions. Improving the lives of your constituents should the goal here and anyone who believes this is wrong has no business representing the people of New Hampshire. Shame on all of you for wasting time on theatrics like this when there are real problems facing the people of New Hampshire. This only furthers the political divide and shows how absolutely inept you are at your jobs! And it’s not lost on any of us that you’re trying to remove the only woman on this board. HELPING YOUR CONSTITUENTS SHOULD BE THE POINT OF YOUR JOB!!!
I believe that these charges are trumped up and do not deserve the time and energy of officials serving the needs of their constituents. I firmly oppose this bill.
Karen Liot Hill is our duly elected Executive Councilor and the only Democrat on the Council. Efforts to impeach her are an attack on the power of our voice as voters. There is no legal basis for this impeachment effort, the second (partisan) impeachment attempt against her. I strongly oppose this bill.
This is a partisan witch hunt
I oppose this bill
Oppose this bill. It reflects the worst of the partisanship that this body has exhibited in its recent history. Shame on this body for even considering such a bill.
Karen has been a dedicated public servant in NH for a couple decades now. She has done nothing but work hard!!
Executive Councilor Karen Liot Hill has represented our district & our state exceedingly well. This resolution would only serve to distract from the deeply important matters before us. It is clearly unnecessary & undeserved. I hope that my colleagues on the Judiciary Committee will see fit to vote unanimously in opposition & focus on what truly matters to the good people of our state.
do NOT impeach Karen Liot Hill. Karen has been a dedicated public servant for decades and is brave enough to represent an alternative point of view. Differences of opinion and perspective provide a better government, not a worse one. You need to be brave enough to consider that.
Karen Liot Hill is our duly elected Executive Councilor and the only Democrat on the Council. Efforts to impeach her are an attack on the power of our voice as voters. There is no legal basis for this impeachment effort.