Chuck Muth Takes Legal Action Against Cisco Aguilar
Chuck Muth has had enough.
The Las Vegas conservative and president of Citizen Outreach Foundation just filed a lawsuit against Nevada Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar.
His claim? The state’s top election official violated Nevada’s public records law by hiding documents from the public.
Muth, whose organization runs the Pigpen Project focused on election integrity, isn’t just another political gadfly. This is a fight over whether Nevada citizens have the right to see what their government is doing with their tax dollars. And for conservatives who believe in limited government and accountability, this case could set a dangerous precedent.
What Chuck Muth Wanted to See
Back in November 2024, Muth filed a simple public records request. He wanted to see documents about an election integrity investigation involving a voter named Charles Spillers.
According to the lawsuit, he had filed an Election Integrity Violations Report against Spillers, whose voting records showed he ‘voted in the 2022 general election in the State of Texas and he also voted by mail in the 2022 general election in Nevada.’
The Secretary of State’s office was supposed to investigate and provide records about what they found. Under Nevada law, they had five business days to respond to Muth’s request. That’s the rule. No exceptions.
194 Days of Stonewalling
Instead of following the law, here’s what Aguilar’s office did:
They took 194 days to provide any meaningful records. As the lawsuit documents:
“It took the SOS One Hundred and Nine Days (109) days, with two specific extensions, to review and provide ten (10) pages of documents to the Petitioner.”
That’s more than six months for what should have been a simple request.
When they finally responded, they gave Muth just 10 pages of basic voter history. Everything else? Hidden.
The lawsuit states that:
“records have been withheld and redacted based on attorney-client privilege and personal privacy interest.”
But here’s the kicker: The state never explained what specific laws justified hiding these records. They just said no.
Even worse, “The SOS failed to produce documents,” a phrase that appears repeatedly throughout the legal filing, showing a clear pattern of non-compliance. The state should have followed the law. Instead, they stonewalled a citizen trying to see how his government handled an election integrity investigation.
Why This Violates Nevada Law
Nevada’s Public Records Act is crystal clear. The purpose of the law is :
“to foster democratic principles by providing members of the public with prompt access to inspect, copy or receive a copy of public books and records to the extent permitted by law.”
The law says government agencies must provide detailed justifications for withholding records. Blanket denials or general assertions are no longer acceptable. You can’t just say “privilege” and walk away.
Even if some information needs to be kept confidential, Nevada’s Public Records law “must be construed liberally” and “any exemption, exception or balancing of interests which limits or restricts access…must be construed narrowly.”
The state should have redacted sensitive information and released the rest. Instead, they hid everything.
What Conservatives Should Care About
This case hits several principles that conservatives hold dear:
Government Accountability: When officials can hide their work from taxpayers, corruption flourishes. Public records laws are one of the few tools citizens have to watch government.
Election Integrity: The records involved an election investigation. If we can’t see how these investigations work, how can we trust the results?
Rule of Law: Nevada’s law requires a five-day response. When government ignores its own rules, it undermines respect for law everywhere.
Limited Government: Transparency keeps government power in check. Secret government is unlimited government.
What’s Really at Stake
This lawsuit will decide whether Nevada agencies can use vague claims to hide public records. If Aguilar wins, it sends a message that government can ignore transparency laws whenever it’s convenient.
If Muth wins, it strengthens every citizen’s right to see what their government is doing. The court case could influence how public records laws work across the country.
Courts are instructed to favor public access unless specific statutes dictate confidentiality. Agencies must provide detailed justifications for withholding records. This case will test whether courts still mean what they say.
Muth isn’t just asking for the records. He’s also seeking financial penalties against the Secretary of State’s office. Nevada law allows up to $10,000 in fines for willful violations of public records law.
The lawsuit also asks the court to force Aguilar’s office to pay Muth’s attorney fees and court costs. When government breaks the law, taxpayers shouldn’t have to pay to fight them in court.
Looking Ahead
The Nevada court will soon decide whether Secretary of State Aguilar violated state law by hiding public records from Chuck Muth. The decision could reshape how government transparency works in Nevada and beyond.
For conservatives who believe government works best when it’s accountable to the people, this case represents a crucial test. Can citizens still force their government to follow the law? Or can officials hide behind vague claims of privilege whenever transparency becomes inconvenient?
Chuck Muth’s lawsuit reminds us that fighting for transparency takes courage. It’s easier to complain about government secrecy than to actually do something about it. Muth chose to act.
The outcome will send a clear message about whether Nevada’s public records law has any real meaning. In a democracy, the default should always be openness, not secrecy. That’s exactly what this case is about.
This article was written with the assistance of AI.
