Lawsuits challenging Nevada’s voter rolls dropped ahead of 2024 election
A conservative organization dropped legal challenges it had filed attempting to force four Nevada counties to address its claims that voter rolls in those counties may have included thousands who had moved out of the area.
Citizen Outreach Foundation filed lawsuits last month in Carson City, Clark, Storey and Washoe counties asking the courts to order the counties to process the group’s challenges of suspected ineligible voters.
On Friday, Chuck Muth, president of the Citizen Outreach Foundation dropped the suits after what he called “nitpicking” objections over certain wording and on whether the group’s challenges needed to be notarized.
The lawsuits were among several filed against Nevada in the lead-up to the November election. The Republican National Committee and other Republican groups have also filed lawsuits challenging the state’s election laws, from its mail ballot processes to its voter roll cleanup procedures. Other lawsuits so far haven’t had success, though none of the cases have officially closed yet. Some are in administrative steps with the court before final dismissal or are waiting appeal.
‘Pigpen Project’
Muth and his group sent multiple citizen-based challenges to counties across the state as part of its “Pigpen Project” that launched in January 2023 with the goal of identifying ineligible voters on Nevada’s voter rolls and working with counties to remove them. The group cross-referenced U.S. Postal Service change of address data and found registrations of people the group thinks has moved away.
Muth said there was no way the issue in his group’s lawsuits could have been resolved before people started sending back their mail ballots, which has already begun. Muth refiled new challenges to the Clark County clerk alleging that ineligible voters remain on the voter rolls, and he said he plans to push for changes to the laws during the next legislative session.
Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar called the voluntary dismissal a “victory for Nevada.” He described the lawsuits as “meritless challenges to our voter rolls” that affected military members and their families who are overseas.
“No eligible voter should be subject to suspicion or confusion about their voter status,” Aguilar said in a statement. “That’s especially true when the challenges do not meet the standards of either Nevada or federal law.”
Muth said the state raised technical issues with the challenges he filed, and he criticized the secretary of state for calling them meritless.
“For him to say they were meritless challenges is pure BS,” he said. “There is merit to them, and if he wanted to work with us, we could have had this cleaned up a long time ago.”
New challenges filed
Under a new section of the law, Muth refiled new challenges that will address the objections the state made. They will also screen out any addresses of potential voters who could be overseas from their list of challenges, which Muth said made up about a dozen of 30,000 challenges.
Muth said the state argued the challenges needed to be notarized. Muth does not know if that’s necessary, but he may have the challenges notarized this time. The state’s oppositional brief, however, did not mention the need for a notary. It made the argument that state law requires challengers to have “personal knowledge” of the voter whose registration is being challenged, and that the challenges cannot be based on databases.
Aguilar said there are multiple systems in place to ensure every eligible Nevada voter, and only eligible voters, can cast a ballot.
“I want all Nevadans to rest assured that our elections remain accurate and secure, and that every eligible voter’s voice will be heard,” Aguilar said.
Democratic Attorney General Aaron Ford said in a statement he is pleased the lawsuits were voluntarily dismissed.
“These frivolous lawsuits are both a waste of time and an assault on Nevadans’ democratic rights,” Ford said. “State and federal law prevent vigilante voter roll maintenance this close to Election Day.”
Contact Jessica Hill at jehill@reviewjournal.com. Follow @jess_hillyeah on X.