On March 26, 2025, the federal district court in New Hampshire rejected a motion by two corporate defendants, Life Corporation and Voice Broadcasting Corporation, to dismiss a lawsuit to stop these corporations and a third defendant, Steve Kramer, from using robocalls to intimidate, threaten, coerce, or deceive voters. The decision ensures that the plaintiffs—the League of Women Voters of New Hampshire (LWV-NH), the League of Women Voters of the United States (LWV-US), and three individual voters—will be able to proceed with their lawsuit to protect New Hampshire voters.

Prior to the New Hampshire 2024 primary election, defendants Steve Kramer, Life Corporation, and Voice Broadcasting orchestrated and disseminated deceptive, intimidating robocalls to thousands of New Hampshire voters. The robocalls used artificial intelligence to mimic then-President Biden’s voice, spoofed a well-respected New Hampshire Democrat (making it appear as if the calls came from her), and improperly included this person’s phone number in the robocall message itself. The message warned voters that if they voted in the primary election, they would lose their right to vote in the general election, and it encouraged them to “save” their vote for the general election. Thousands of voters received these calls in a short period of time, less than two days before polls opened for the primary election in November.

LWV-NH, LWV-US and the individual plaintiffs have asked the court to stop the defendants from orchestrating or disseminating similarly threatening or deceptive messages to voters in the future. Life Corporation and Voice Broadcasting Corporation asked the court to dismiss the case—arguing that the plaintiffs were not harmed by the thousands of threatening, deceptive calls, and that these calls did not violate federal or state law. The court disagreed. It held that the plaintiffs sufficiently pleaded their standing to bring the case, and have sufficiently asserted their claims that the defendants’ actions violated the Voting Rights Act, the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, and New Hampshire state laws. As the court explained, “it is plain that the message was designed to make voters fearful of voting in the primary by suggesting that their primary vote could somehow dilute or invalidate their vote in the November general election . . . . It was, in short, an effort to suppress their vote.” The court’s ruling allows the plaintiffs’ case to move forward.

The court unfortunately denied the plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction. As a result, the defendants may create or disseminate intimidating, threatening, coercive, or disinformation robocalls to voters while the case is pending. Plaintiffs look forward to proving their claims and ultimately obtaining relief that protects voters in future elections.

Separately, Plaintiffs and Lingo Telecom reached a mutually agreeable settlement that resolves the pending litigation brought by Plaintiffs against Lingo Telecom regarding the 2024 New Hampshire Presidential Primary. All litigation between these parties has been settled and dismissed on confidential terms. The parties are pleased to amicably resolve the matter.

The plaintiffs are represented by Free Speech For People and by pro bono co-counsel Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and local counsel Preti, Flaherty, Beliveau & Pachios, Chartered, LLP.

Read the order denying the motion to dismiss here.

Read the order denying preliminary injunction here.

Read more about the case here.