Surrounded by a large crowd of supporters in front of the State House on Wednesday, embattled Executive Councilor Karen Liot Hill (D-Lebanon) said the impeachment resolution filed by state Rep. Joe Sweeney (R-Salem) was an attack on free speech.
“Impeachment is for misconduct. It’s not for disagreement. And using it against lawful speech is not accountability. It, in fact, threatens free expression for all of us,” Liot Hill said.
The speech in question is a series of emails Liot Hill sent in her official capacity as an executive councilor recruiting plaintiffs for a potential lawsuit against New Hampshire’s voter ID law, and directing them to a high-profile Democratic law firm in Washington, D.C.
In emails sent from her official Executive Council account and first reported by NHJournal, Liot Hill refers potential plaintiffs to the Elias Law Firm. That’s the same Marc Elias who helped Hillary Clinton fund the research used in the now-debunked dossier behind the Russia collusion hoax.
Supporters at a Karen Liot Hill press conference on Jan. 7, 2026.
“It should come as no surprise that Karen Liot Hill is involved in another unethical scandal. She previously misused campaign dollars; now we come to learn that she’s electioneering with taxpayer dollars,” New Hampshire GOP Chair Jim MacEachern said at the time.
Last month, a New Hampshire judge granted Attorney General John Formella’s motion to dismiss the Elias Law lawsuit advocated by Liot Hill, rendering the issue moot.
At her State House press conference, Liot Hill repeatedly referenced a letter from the Attorney General’s Office stating that no action would be taken on a complaint filed by MacEachern. It said that her actions advancing the lawsuit raised concerns about “an appearance of impropriety,” but added, “Nonetheless, based on the text of the emails and the interviews with the recipients, this office cannot conclude that the emails constituted a misuse of position or otherwise violated the executive branch ethics code.”
“After examining the facts, the Attorney General’s Office found no violation of state law or ethics. That review is complete, and the conduct was cleared as lawful,” Liot Hill said. “Despite that, some elected officials are continuing to pursue an impeachment inquiry, not because I did something illegal or unethical, but because they disagree with what I said.”
Liot Hill, who frequently refers to herself as “the top Democrat in state government,” suggested that the impeachment resolution against her is an attack on democracy itself.
“Free speech is not just an individual right. It’s a public good. People speak up, organize, criticize the government, and help one another because they trust they won’t be punished for doing so lawfully,” Liot Hill said. “In many parts of the world, people can be arrested for criticizing their government. That is not how democracy works.”
Sweeney, who filed the impeachment resolution, dismissed Liot Hill’s attempt to portray herself as a martyr for free speech.
“Karen Liot Hill knows exactly why she is being held accountable. She used her position as an Executive Councilor to recruit litigants for a lawsuit against the State of New Hampshire. She actively assisted an out-of-state Washington, D.C. law firm in suing our own state over common-sense, pragmatic voter integrity laws supported by Granite Staters,” Sweeney said.
“That conduct is malpractice and maladministration. Full stop.”
Several House Republicans who’ve spoken to NHJournal on background took a wait-and-see approach to the impeachment resolution, echoing Liot Hill’s observation that no state official had been impeached in more than 20 years.
“Historically, it has been used sparingly and exclusively in cases involving judges where there is no opportunity for accountability to the voters,” Liot Hill said Wednesday.
But House GOP sources say the impeachment process would address issues surrounding Liot Hill’s actions as both a political candidate and Executive Councilor that go beyond the Elias Law case.
Liot Hill has been embroiled in controversy even before taking office. During the 2024 campaign, questions were raised about her use of campaign funds and the legality of her filings with the Secretary of State’s Office.
In October, she was fined by the Attorney General’s Office over how she spent her campaign funds.
“Expenditures for personal subsistence, such as clothing, home heating oil, groceries, and personal meals, are not proper expenditures,” according to the Attorney General’s Office.
Sweeney says Liot Hill isn’t a victim; she’s the problem.
“This is not about silencing voters. It is about enforcing standards and protecting the integrity of state government,” Sweeney said.
“For this level of misconduct, impeachment is not extreme. It is appropriate.”
