Nevada Judge Allows Voter ID Ballot Initiative, Says It Doesn’t Violate State Constitution

A person votes in the primary election at the Desert Breeze Community Center in Spring Valley, Nev., on Feb. 6, 2024. Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times

One Nevada judge has upheld a ballot initiative to require voters to show ID, while another judge rejected a plan to establish an independent redistricting commission.

In a March 6 order, state District Judge William Maddox ruled that Nevada residents can vote on whether the state will enact voter ID requirements.

The order was in response to a lawsuit filed by voter Jennifer Fleischmann against Nevada Secretary of State Francisco Aguilar.

The lawsuit challenged a ballot initiative that would amend the state’s constitution to require voter ID, in addition to requiring residents who vote by mail to add an identification number to their mail-in ballot.

The initiative calls for an addition to Article 2 of the Nevada Constitution, stating, “Each voter in Nevada shall present a photo identification to verify their identity when voting in person at a polling place during early voting or on election day before being provided a ballot,” according to the lawsuit.

“To be considered valid, the photo identification must be current or expired for no more than four years,” the proposed amendment states.

In addition, the “Voter Verification” section would require voters to include either the last four digits of their driver’s license number, the last four digits of their Social Security number, or a number provided by the clerk when the voter registers.

Repair the Vote

Ms. Fleischmann, the plaintiff in the case, argued that the petition would violate Article 19, Section 6 of the Nevada Constitution “by failing to provide for a funding mechanism for the changes it proposes, including the necessary expenditures of public funds to expand access to free photo identification for eligible voters.”

“Plaintiff also argues that the description of effect does not comply with Nevada law because it omits information about the Petition, including the need for an additional revenue source, a description of what forms of identification would be acceptable, and an explanation of what form the ‘additional verification’ of identity for mail-in ballot would take,” the complaint says. “Plaintiff asks this court to enjoin the Secretary of State from taking further action on the Petition and prohibiting the Petition from being placed on the general election ballot.”

A man named David Gibbs filed the petition for the ballot initiative in November 2023 on behalf of Repair the Vote, a political action committee (PAC).

“Every citizen needs faith that the election process is fair and accurate,” Repair the Vote’s website states. “A big part of that is to verify the identity of every voter, just as companies verify the identity of the person getting on an aircraft, checking in at a hotel, or cashing a check at a bank. When voters lose faith in the process that drives elections, they also lose faith in the outcome and in the legitimacy of those declared the winners.”

In his ruling dismissing Ms. Fleischmann’s challenge, Judge Maddox wrote that the petition didn’t “create an appropriation or unfunded expenditure, and therefore does not violate Article 19, Section 6 of the Nevada Constitution.”

Fair Maps Nevada

However, District Judge Robert Estes also ruled on March 6 that a separate ballot initiative to set up a seven-member committee to redraw congressional and state legislative maps—currently mapped out by the state Legislature—would violate Article 19, Section 6 of the Nevada Constitution because it would create “an appropriation or unfunded expenditure.”

Fair Maps Nevada, the organization behind the redistricting effort, filed two nearly identical petitions, which differed only in the date they would go into effect. One petition would have the proposed commission redraw the congressional and state legislative maps starting in 2027, while the other would wait until the next redistricting cycle in 2031, The Nevada Independent reported.

“The Court concludes that the Petitions violate Article 19, Section 6 because they would require the expenditure of state funds but would not raise any revenue,” the order stated. “The Petitions would create a new government body, the Commission, and mandate that it undertake legislative redistricting, subject to detailed procedural and substantive requirements. Complying with these requirements will invariably require government expenditures.”

Fair Maps Nevada was founded by the League of Women Voters, described by Influence Watch as a “left-of-center organization” that lobbies for progressive issues. The organization has been supported by George Soros’ Foundation to Promote Open Society and the Ford Foundation.

Petitioners must collect a minimum of 102,362 signatures for their initiative to be included on the ballot, according to the Nevada secretary of state’s office. This includes up to 25,591 signatures from each of the state’s four petition districts, which align with the state’s congressional districts.

Software Glitches

Since the 2020 presidential election, efforts to repair election issues have ramped up.

Earlier in February, it was reported that there was a glitch in the software which led to fake reports of people voting in the presidential preference primary in Nevada.

“On Sunday, February 18, the Secretary of State’s Office became aware of possible technical issues related to the voting history of individuals who did not participate in the Presidential Preference Primary,” Mr. Aguilar said in a statement to multiple media outlets.

He added that the vote totals were not affected by the glitch.

“It is important to note that vote history is generated separately from election results,” he said. “Results on SilverStateElection.NV and county canvasses of the votes are unaffected and accurate.”

President Joe Biden won the Nevada Democratic primary. Former President Donald Trump didn’t participate in the primary, leaving former candidate Nikki Haley to lose to the “none of these candidates” option, which received the most votes in the Republican primary.