© 2025 Connecticut Public

FCC Public Inspection Files:
WEDH · WEDN · WEDW · WEDY
WECS · WEDW-FM · WNPR · WPKT · WRLI-FM · WVOF
Public Files Contact · ATSC 3.0 FAQ
Play Live Radio
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
0:00 0:00
Available On Air Stations

NH Supreme Court sides with white supremacist group over highway banner in Portsmouth

Christopher Hood, left, along with Leo Cullinan, during a hearing in 2023. Cullinan has since died.
Todd Bookman
/
NHPR
Christopher Hood, left, along with Leo Cullinan — both members of the white supremacist group NSC-131 — during a court hearing in 2023. Cullinan has since died.

The state Supreme Court has ruled that the New Hampshire Attorney General misapplied the state’s Civil Rights Act when it sought to charge members of a regional white supremacist group for hanging a racist banner in Portsmouth in 2022.

The court’s unanimous ruling issued Friday upheld a lower court ruling that rejected the state’s overly broad interpretation of the Civil Rights Act as a possible chill on free speech.

“Such a broad sweep discourages the expression of certain messages for fear of government sanctions under the Act based on the content of the messages expressed,” the justices said in their 11-page opinion.

At issue was a banner that read “Keep New England White” that was briefly hung from an overpass above Route 1 in Portsmouth. Members of NSC-131 did not have a permit to hang the banner, and removed it when approached by local law enforcement. Six months later, the Attorney General filed civil complaints against the group and its purported leader, Christopher Hood, as well as another member, Leo Cullinan, who has since died.

The complaint alleged that the group violated the Civil Rights Act by trespassing on government property, and that they were motivated to do so by racial animus.

A lawyer for NSC-131 said during oral arguments last year that the state was selectively and arbitrarily enforcing the law.

The state Supreme Court’s decision focused in large part on the definition of the term “trespass” in state law, and whether the group knew they were trespassing by walking onto the overpass and affixing a sign to it. The justices ruled that the Attorney General’s office failed to establish that the group knew they were trespassing.

The justices noted their decision was narrow in nature, and only applied to enforcement of the Civil Rights Act in cases involving allegations of trespassing.

“While we are disappointed by the court's decision, we respect it,” said a spokesperson for the New Hampshire Attorney General’s office. “Our office remains steadfast in enforcing the Civil Rights Act to ensure all Granite Staters are free from discrimination, violence, and hate-motivated threats. We will continue to explore all options to protect the rights and safety of our communities.”

Todd started as a news correspondent with NHPR in 2009. He spent nearly a decade in the non-profit world, working with international development agencies and anti-poverty groups. He holds a master’s degree in public administration from Columbia University. He can be reached at tbookman@nhpr.org.

Stand up for civility

This news story is funded in large part by Connecticut Public’s Members — listeners, viewers, and readers like you who value fact-based journalism and trustworthy information.

We hope their support inspires you to donate so that we can continue telling stories that inform, educate, and inspire you and your neighbors. As a community-supported public media service, Connecticut Public has relied on donor support for more than 50 years.

Your donation today will allow us to continue this work on your behalf. Give today at any amount and join the 50,000 members who are building a better—and more civil—Connecticut to live, work, and play.

Related Content