Nevada Judge Dismisses Trump’s Vote-By-Mail Sabotage Attempt


With just 44 days to go until the 2020 presidential elections and Trump literally losing to Biden in every reputable poll, the pressure to upend the election is heating up. Attempts to tie mail-in voting procedures up in court are rapidly failing, with yet another judge shutting down the Trump campaign’s attempts to challenge the state’s rights to determine how their elections will be run.

Nevada is one of a handful of states where mail-in ballots will be sent to all active, registered voters in the state in order to slow the spread of COVID-19. The Trump campaign’s lawyers offered the court a number of reasons why they and their voters could be harmed by the process, but Judge James Mahan of Nevada wasn’t impressed.

‘A federal district court judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed by President Donald Trump’s campaign seeking to block Nevada’s expanded mail-in voting laws for the 2020 election over a lack of standing.

‘The order, by Judge James Mahan, was filed late Friday and dismisses the lawsuit brought by the president’s re-election campaign over a new Nevada law that will send mail ballots to all active voters for the 2020 election, as well as several other changes to the election process in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.’

The judge made clear that none of the reasons offered so far are credible, and claims that the new voting plan will cause chaos and confusion fell short when the judge considered how soon before the 2020 elections the plaintiffs had Brought the case to court. Saying that there was no way to determine ahead of the election whether officials there have the right to expand mail-in voting before the election, he wrote in his decision that it is too close to hold any vote up now.

‘Although they purport to allege constitutional harms that go beyond these policy disagreements, at this juncture, plaintiffs’ allegations remain just that. Since initiating this matter on August 4, 2020, plaintiffs have not requested an injunction or expedited review. Plaintiffs ask for a remedy to cure the ‘confusion’ caused by AB4, yet they have positioned this case for last minute adjudication before the general election.’

Other measures, such as requiring that a minimum number of voting locations be open in urban counties, would also be unnecessarily affected by a ruling to overturn the bill that allows Nevada voters to receive a mail-in ballot and vote by mail in the 2020 elections.

‘An injunction against the enforcement of AB4 would not address plaintiffs’ issues with the discretion that Nevada election officials have to establish in-person voting locations. It would instead eliminate the safeguard of a minimum number of in-person voting locations from all counties.’