Concord — The state’s chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union has reinstated its lawsuit against New Hampshire Secretary of State Bill Gardner challenging his decision to comply with the Trump administration’s request for voter data.

The suit, which the ACLU-NH filed on behalf of two state lawmakers earlier this month, was put on hold pending separate litigation on the matter filed in the District of Columbia. On Monday, a federal judge ruled in that case that President Donald Trump’s Election Integrity Commission could go forward with its request to all 50 states for publicly available voter information.

The Electronic Privacy Information Center, a privacy watchdog group, had sought an injunction against the request on the grounds that it violated a federal privacy law. The Washington judge ruled that the commission was a presidential advisory panel — not a federal agency — and so wasn’t subject to the law. EPIC has appealed.

The president’s election commission has asked states to turn over information from their voter rolls, including partial Social Security numbers, birthdays, criminal records and military status for individual voters.

Gardner, who is not only New Hampshire’s secretary of state but also a member of Trump’s commission, has said that he would share the Granite State’s voter information with Washington that he considered public — including names, addresses and party affiliations — but not private details like Social Security numbers.

“I intend to release that public information, and expect to end up doing that,” he said on Thursday.

In its suit, the ACLU-NH argues that Gardner doesn’t have the authority to do so. According to New Hampshire law, the state can — and regularly does — sell its voter rolls to political parties, committees and candidates. The general public, on the other hand, can view the statewide checklist at the state archives but cannot print, copy or manipulate the data. They also can go town by town to buy hard copies of local checklists for $25 apiece.

Paul Twomey, co-counsel with the ACLU, said the ruling in the federal suit didn’t foreshadow an outcome in the local lawsuit. The ACLU’s challenge is based on New Hampshire law, not federal statutes.

“The state law is completely explicit as to both the types of information that can be given out, the recipients that it can be given to, and the manner of transmission. All three of those things are important,” he said. State law includes a “very clear, explicit limitation” on the secretary of state’s power, Twomey said, which is unique to the state.

“I haven’t read anything about any other state that limits the form of the dissemination of the information. The form of the dissemination of the information is very important because what you can do with a big database is you can start matching it up with other publicly available databases, and you can then put these things together in a way that you can get some very private information about people,” he said.