Last week, Hillsborough Superior Court Judge Charles Temple recused himself from the voter residency requirement case.

In stepping aside, Temple cited his long-standing personal relationship with Bryan Gould, who was recently hired by the New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office to assist with the case.

“After wondering and thinking about the nature and extent of this particular relationship, the Court is convinced on a subjective basis that he has a personal bias concerning Attorney Gould that requires disqualification under rule 2.1,” Temple wrote in his decision.

Temple also wrote that another judge could easily take the case and keep it on track for its scheduled August trial, noting that it would be inappropriate for the state to drop Gould because of his friendship. He also stated that if he remained on the case, there would be a public perception of bias involved.

This, certainly, was no easy decision for Temple. And, despite the fact that the New Hampshire Supreme Court is preparing to consider whether he erred in ordering the release of information from the statewide voter database, the longtime judge always has been well above board during his time on the bench.

Voter privacy, registration and even voter fraud have been hot issues the past several years, even in the Granite State.

In recusing himself from these proceedings, Temple paves the way for an unfettered and absolute decision that will likely strike a cord in capital cities all around the nation.