CONCORD — House and Senate legal counsels are considering whether a superior court judge should be asked to reconsider his ruling that blocks a new voter registration law from taking effect.

While legislative leaders were confident on Tuesday that the Attorney General's Office would appeal Strafford County Superior Court Judge John Lewis's ruling by the end of the week, by Wednesday they were less clear.

House chief of staff Greg Moore said House and Senate counsels are very concerned that a number of facts were not introduced at the trial court level and therefore could not be considered by the Supreme Court if the judge's preliminary decision is appealed.

He said they are in consultation with Secretary of State Bill Gardner and the attorney general about the possibility of making a motion to reconsider the decision to introduce new facts.

The attorney general in arguing the case at Strafford County Superior Court did not introduce the argument that the Legislature had moved the definition of resident to that of domiciliary with the goal of bringing the two definitions back together again, Moore noted.

House Speaker William O'Brien said Tuesday that Lewis did not understand that Senate Bill 318 made the definition of domicile and residency synonymous.

“The law says you cannot be both a resident of another state and domiciled here in this state,” O'Brien said. “We're not saying people domiciled here can't vote. They can, but when they do they become residents of New Hampshire.”

He said the concept is similar to what the law was from the 1970s to 2007 when a change was made that said “A person's claim of domicile for voting purposes shall not be conclusive of the person's residency for any other legal purpose.”

That sentence was removed in , O'Brien said.

Moore said Wednesday that Judge Lewis even noted in his opinion that the attorney general did not make that argument during the proceedings.

But Moore said the responsibility to decide where to reconsider the decision lies with the secretary of state, who is the defendant in the case and represented by the attorney general.

“From our perspective, there are some important facts to the case that need to be made,” Moore said.

On Tuesday Senate President Peter Bragdon said both House and Senate legal counsels are working “to get our perspective and view on the matter before the court in some way, shape or form. We're just not sure of the proper place.”

The new law requires people who register to vote to be domiciled in the state and that they be informed they will need to register their autos here and apply for a New Hampshire driver's license within 60 days.

Supporters of the law passed this year when the Legislature overrode Gov. John Lynch's veto, said people who vote in the state ought to be domiciled here, while opponents called it an attempt to stop college students who are not from New Hampshire from voting.

The American Civil Liberties Union of New Hampshire and the League of Women Voters filed the challenge on behalf of four out-of-state college students.

The groups argued the law is a blatant attempt to prevent college students from voting because it refers to domicile and residence as having the same meaning, when they have different legal definitions.

Lewis directed the Secretary of State's Office to reissue voter registration forms without the statement about auto registration and license requirements.

- - - - - - - -

Garry Rayno may be reached at grayno@unionleader.com.