A federal judge may have thrown up a roadblock, and Democrats have filed legislation to repeal it, but State House Republicans are hitting the gas on their proposal to end New Hampshire’s vehicle inspection mandate.
“It is disappointing but not surprising to see unaccountable federal judges side with self-interested out-of-state contractors to spit in the face of Granite Staters and New Hampshire state law,” House Majority Leader Jason Osborne said Wednesday.
GOP lawmakers voted last year to curb the annual inspection regime, arguing the inspections do not keep roads safe and are a financial burden for Granite Staters. But that vote did not sit well with Gordon-Darby, the Louisville, Ky. based company that has the exclusive contract to provide auto emissions tests and related services in New Hampshire.
Gordon-Darby filed a federal lawsuit against the state after being notified its contract would end Jan. 31, when the inspection repeal law goes into effect. Gordon-Darby argued in court that New Hampshire’s inspection repeal violates federal law. The company also said it would lose at least $4.1 million in inspection fees in 2026, forcing the closure of its New Hampshire operations.
U.S. District Court Judge Landya McCafferty issued an injunction against the state on Wednesday, siding with Gordon-Darby. McCafferty ruled that New Hampshire’s inspection repeal would violate the federal Clean Air Act and that the sticker program must continue.
“Here, the state of New Hampshire has enacted legislation that is directly contrary to the requirements of New Hampshire’s SIP (State Implementation Plan) as incorporated by reference into the Clean Air Act. Unless the EPA approves a SIP amendment before Jan. 31, New Hampshire will indisputably be violating the Clean Air Act as of that date,” McCafferty wrote.
Now Republicans are racing to draft a new plan to keep Granite State drivers on the road and sticker-free.
“We’re confident it can be overturned,” Rep. Henry Giasson (R-Goffstown) told NHJournal.
New Hampshire’s annual safety inspection includes an emissions test as part of Clean Air Act requirements. McCafferty’s ruling allows New Hampshire to permanently end safety inspections if it can obtain federal approval for a new plan to check vehicle emissions.
Rep. Michael Granger (R-Milton), who sponsored the repeal legislation, said plans are in the works to seek that approval.
“If the EPA approves New Hampshire’s modification to the State Implementation Plan, then the justification for the injunction wholly disappears. The current EPA administrator is a man named Lee Zeldin, a Trump appointee. The faster they approve the changes, the better,” Granger said.
Even before the judge’s ruling, House Democrats had filed legislation to reinstate the inspection mandate — and the costs that come with it.
Republicans insist drivers will never again face the hassle and expense of inspections, regardless of what the courts or Democrats say.
Osborne (R-Auburn) said Republican lawmakers are pushing the Live Free and Drive Amendment, which would make the lack of an inspection sticker an unenforceable violation.
“House Republicans will not give up on freeing you from the burdensome inspection mandate, and that’s why today we’re proposing the Live Free and Drive Amendment. You have my word. We are already taking steps to protect you from this activist judge’s injunction,” Osborne said.
The Live Free and Drive proposal would reclassify the absence of an inspection sticker as a non-moving secondary offense, meaning police could not pull over drivers solely for lacking a current sticker. Drivers would not be denied insurance or considered at fault in accidents for not having a valid sticker. Any citation for noninspection would carry a maximum fine of $1.
New Hampshire is one of just 14 states that require vehicle safety inspections, which do little to make roads safer, Giasson said.
During the debate over ending the inspection mandate, Giasson noted New Hampshire does not conduct a traditional emissions test — “we don’t even have the equipment for that” — but instead relies on an “engine-light-on” report.
Rather than placing a sensor in the tailpipe to measure exhaust fumes, inspectors plug a scanner into the vehicle’s computer port. The scan checks whether the vehicle’s internal monitoring system has detected any faults. If the system detects a problem — such as a sensor failure or vapor leak — it triggers the “check engine” light.
“That doesn’t mean that your emissions have changed, but the way New Hampshire interpreted the rule was that any check engine light was an automatic emissions failure,” Giasson said.
For now, drivers may be unsure what to do next — and state officials acknowledge the uncertainty.
New Hampshire Attorney General John Formella said Wednesday he is still reviewing McCafferty’s ruling and does not yet have guidance for drivers, according to WMUR.
Lawmakers such as Granger blame the situation squarely on Gordon-Darby.
“This injunction is inspired by one thing and one thing only: the greed of Gordon-Darby and the New Hampshire Auto Dealers Association. If New Hampshire citizens are angry, they should be angry at them,” Granger said.
Executive Councilor John Stephens (R-Manchester) said there will be consequences for Gordon-Darby and its lawsuit.
“Our elected representatives spoke clearly when they ended the mandatory vehicle emissions inspection program, and no out-of-state vendor should be permitted to use federal courts to override the democratic process in our state,” Stephens said.
Gordon-Darby has held the contract for New Hampshire’s inspection system since 2004. Its current contract was originally set to run through the end of 2026 before last year’s vote moved the termination date to Jan. 31.
Stephens said Wednesday he will ensure the company does not profit from the lawsuit.
“Let me be crystal clear: With Gordon-Darby’s contract set to expire on January 31, the Department of Safety and the attorney general must bring any proposed changes to the current termination schedule before the Executive Council for approval. Not one additional dime should be paid to this self-interested vendor without council authorization,” Stephens said.
“Gordon-Darby made its choice when it weaponized the legal system against New Hampshire. The Executive Council has a duty to protect taxpayers from a company that has demonstrated it will put its profit margins above the expressed will of our Legislature, our governor, and the people of this state.”
Giasson said he plans to go further, introducing legislation that would bar Gordon-Darby from doing any business with the state of New Hampshire for at least 30 years.
“I’m a small business owner. I don’t get to sue people who don’t buy my products,” Giasson said. “I never want to hear their name again.”
Giasson is going even further, introducing a proposal that would bar Gordon-Darby from doing any business with the state of New Hampshire for at least 30 years. Gordon-Darby offers vehicle inspection products in several states, as well as fish and game license products. It does not currently have the New Hampshire Fish and Game license contract.
“I’m a small business owner. I don’t get to sue people who don’t buy my products,” Giasson said. “I never want to hear their name again.”