Nevada “Fake Electors” Seek Removal of Judge

Six Nevada Republicans charged in the state’s so-called “fake electors” case are asking a Carson City judge to step aside, arguing he cannot fairly preside over proceedings tied to the disputed 2020 presidential election.

Attorneys for Stoey County Clerk Jim Hindle and five other Republican officials have filed a motion seeking the recusal of District Court Judge James Russell, citing what they describe as “actual bias.”

Russell previously presided over legal challenges brought by the Nevada Republican Party following the 2020 election. In that case, he rejected efforts to block the certification of Joe Biden’s victory in Nevada, without ever reviewing the evidence.

Defense attorneys argue Russell’s ruling is “inextricably intertwined” with their clients’ central defense in the current criminal case. The defendants contend they signed alternative electoral certificates in December 2020 as part of what they characterize as a First Amendment-protected effort to preserve ongoing legal challenges to the election results.

In addition to Russell’s prior ruling, the motion references public comments he made in 2024 regarding election fraud litigation. According to court filings, Russell said, “Thank God for the judicial branch in the United States,” in reference to cases challenging the 2020 election. He also disclosed that he had received dozens of death threats following his 2020 decision.

Defense attorneys argue those comments and experiences raise concerns about impartiality, asserting they suggest the judge views lawsuits related to the 2020 election as part of an improper effort.

Judges are required to recuse themselves in cases where their impartiality is reasonably in question. Legal experts note that prior rulings alone do not typically require recusal, as judges frequently handle cases involving similar legal issues. However, recusal may be warranted if there is evidence of personal bias or prejudice related to the parties or subject matter.

Opponents of the motion argue that Russell’s prior involvement in election-related litigation does not disqualify him from overseeing the criminal case and contend the request may be a strategic attempt to seek a different judge.

The Nevada case is part of broader legal proceedings stemming from the 2020 election. President Donald Trump has issued federal pardons for the six Nevada defendants.

The pardons do not apply to state charges. Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford’s office continues to pursue prosecution at the state level.

In addition to the Carson City case, the defendants are facing a parallel proceeding in Clark County. The Nevada Supreme Court recently ordered that the case be resumed. Because both matters cannot go to jury trial simultaneously, the timing and rulings in one jurisdiction could influence the other.

If Judge Russell denies the motion to recuse, the defense will seek appellate review. The outcome of the recusal request could shape the course of one of Nevada’s most closely watched election-related prosecutions.