Written by Luke Thompson.

A lawsuit filed by the Republican National Committee, the Nevada Republican Party, and Donald Trump’s campaign claims that Nevada’s mail ballot deadline contravenes federal law. According to the lawsuit, Nevada permits the counting of mail-in ballots up to four days after Election Day if they are postmarked by Election Day. This, the plaintiffs argue, presumes incorrectly that late ballots were sent on time, potentially mixing valid ballots with invalid ones, which they claim dilutes the electoral process.

RNC Chairman Michael Whatley expressed concerns, stating that counting ballots after Election Day “violates federal law and undermines election integrity in the state.” His statements reflect a broader Republican stance that seeks to secure what they see as an honest election by challenging these rules in court.

Defending State Practices

On the flip side, Nevada Secretary of State Francisco Aguilar, while declining to comment on ongoing litigation, defended the state’s election procedures. He highlighted Nevada’s commitment to secure, transparent, and accessible elections, emphasizing that allowing mail-in ballots helps accommodate working Nevadans. His office stressed the importance of voter education over litigation, setting a tone of prioritizing voter access over restrictive measures.

Aguilar’s defense aligns with the state’s argument that accommodating voters, especially through mail-in ballots, is crucial for inclusivity. However, this has not deterred the Trump campaign and its allies, who view the acceptance of late-arriving mail ballots as a legal and ethical issue, potentially affecting election outcomes.

The Core of the Controversy

The core issue stems from a disagreement over how election laws should interpret the timing of ballot counting. The plaintiffs argue that by allowing mail-in ballots to be counted if they arrive up to four days post-Election Day, Nevada is violating federal guidelines that stipulate a single Election Day. This practice, they claim, could lead to the counting of untimely and thus invalid ballots, infringing on the rights of candidates and voters alike.

This lawsuit is part of a broader trend where election practices, especially related to mail-in voting, have become highly contentious. The debate is fueled by concerns over election integrity, with critics often pointing to unproven claims of widespread voter fraud associated with mail-in voting. Nevada, like many states, sends mail ballots to all registered voters unless they opt out, a practice that has come under scrutiny in recent years.

Our Take

The ongoing legal battle in Nevada highlights significant tensions in American politics regarding voter access and election integrity. While proponents of strict ballot deadlines argue for the sanctity of Election Day, opponents of such measures advocate for greater voter accessibility, especially for those who may not be able to vote in person. The legal outcomes of these cases could set precedents that influence election laws across the United States, shaping how democracy functions in the era of increasing mail-in voting. The debate is not merely legalistic but touches the very core of democratic participation and the balance between preventing fraud and promoting voter turnout.