A lawsuit was filed against Nevada’s Senate Bill 406, known as the Election Worker Protection Bill, in June by four plaintiffs represented by Attorney and Republican National Committeewoman Sigal Chattah.
The lawsuit targeted Republican Governor Joe Lombardo and Democratic Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar, questioning the legality of the recently enacted legislation.
The Election Worker Protection Bill introduces a new category of criminal offenses related to “undefined” election workers. Proposed by Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar, the bill passed both chambers of the Nevada Legislature and was subsequently signed into law by Governor Lombardo.
However, U.S. District Court Judge Cristina D. Silva dismissed the initial lawsuit in late October. Silva emphasized that the plaintiffs lacked standing, as they failed to demonstrate an imminent, credible threat of harm or prosecution, adding that a plaintiff’s subjective and irrational fear of prosecution does not suffice to establish standing.
Undeterred, Sigal Chattah, the attorney for the plaintiffs, filed an amended complaint after the dismissal. Chattah argues that Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford’s previous statements create a “reasonable threat” of prosecution.
In a Tuesday, September 29, 2020, statement, Ford expressed his readiness to prosecute individuals engaging in voter intimidation in response to President Donald Trump’s debate call for supporters to “watch very carefully” at polling places. Ford considered Trump’s remarks a “dog whistle” for voter intimidation.
The plaintiffs’ argument revolves around the broad and undefined definition of an “election official,” as stated in Chapter 293 of the law. They contend that the definition relies on “absurd” subjective complaints of threats and intimidation, potentially resulting in Class E felony charges.
Additionally, the plaintiffs assert that the law may conflict with existing Nevada statutes that allow the general public, poll watchers, and volunteers to observe polling places and ballot locations. The outcome could have significant implications for election laws in Nevada and potentially set a precedent for similar challenges in other states.