Earlier this month, 19 states filed a lawsuit against President Trump’s Executive Order (EO) titled “Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections”.
Nevada State Attorney General Aaron Ford joined this lawsuit.
The lawsuit claims this EO will “transform how federal elections are conducted throughout the Nation.”
What is the Nevada Secretary of State saying about the EO?
Last Friday, Cisco Aguilar, the NV Secretary of State, wrote a scathing article criticizing the President’s Executive Order on Elections in an opinion to the editor of MSNBC.
In summary, Mr. Aguilar claims that the President’s executive order is unlawful, an attack on the integrity of our election system, engages in election interference, violates the separation of powers, and would have disastrous consequences for America’s voters.
He is concerned that the EO “seeks to unleash Elon Musk’s DOGE on secure state systems which protect voter’s information.”
He is very concerned that the EO “threatens to withhold already-approved election integrity funds and to target states with Justice Department investigations if states fail to comply.”
It should be noted that since 2003, Nevada has received $36 million in federal funds to help administer elections. A total of $4.35 billion has been granted to all states in this period.
He also claims that only 1% of ballots are received after Election Day, By our calculation, that’s is about fifteen thousand ballots for Nevada. However, there is a big difference between mail ballots “received” versus “processed and votes cast”.
In Clark County, almost 19% of mail ballots were processed and results published after Election Day, November 5, 2024 – that comes to approximately 84K ballots. It’s broken down as follows: ~31K from Democrats, ~38K from NP/Other, and ~16K from Republicans.
Nevadans overwhelmingly want final results published by the end of Election Day.
Let’s dig a little further into key details of the lawsuit:
The 19 plaintiff States represented in the lawsuit are:
CALIFORNIA; NEVADA; MASSACHUSETTS; ARIZONA; COLORADO; CONNECTICUT; DELAWARE; HAWAII; ILLINOIS; MAINE; MARYLAND; MICHIGAN; MINNESOTA; NEW JERSEY; NEW MEXICO; NEW YORK; RHODE ISLAND; VERMONT; WISCONSIN
The defendants in the lawsuit are:
- DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the United States;
- PAMELA BONDI, Attorney General of the United States;
- All 5 members of the UNITED STATES ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION;
- PETE HEGSETH, Secretary of Defense.
The President maintains in the EO that “the United States now fails to enforce basic and necessary election protections employed”. In layman’s terms, this EO is executing his power to enforce the laws that are on the books.
The lawsuit says that “The Elections EO violates the Constitution. It interferes with States’ inherent sovereignty and their constitutional power to regulate the time, place, and manner of federal elections.”
It also claims that “the President has no constitutional authority to “make or alter” laws governing federal elections”
Let’s look at what the EO is aiming to enforce:
Only US Citizens can vote in federal elections
The EO directs agencies to require proof of citizenship. It directs the Election Assistance Commission (EAC) to modify the national voter registration form to reflect this requirement and identifies examples of proper proof, such as passports, military ID or REAL-ID compliant license.
Currently, the voter registration form relies on the honor system: the registrant fills out a checkmark confirming their citizenship. No further questions asked. This leaves a loophole allowing non-citizens to register to vote. Enforcement after the fact is very difficult and practically non-existent.
The lawsuit claims that “requirements for federal voter registration forms would harm both Plaintiff States and their citizens”, although no further detail on the nature of the harm is specified.
Federal law establishes a uniform Election Day
The EO points out that States fail to comply with the Federal law by counting ballots received after Election Day.
The lawsuit establishes that the EO “effectively precludes States from administering vote-by-mail systems that permit voters to make their choices by Election Day, upending processes that accommodate more voters, decrease obstacles, and increase voter participation.”
But isn’t the purpose of Election Day to have the final count and results available on that day?
It seems that these 19 States want to have their cake and eat it too. They want to have the ability to count ballots and report on results for an undefined amount of time after Election Day.
When will there ever be enough time?
The Election Assistance Commission, Department of Defense and other Federal agencies are tasked with enforcement
- The EO directs the EAC to enforce the “Federal prohibition on foreign nationals voting in Federal elections”. Specifically, the EAC must modify the national mail voter registration form to require documentary proof of US citizenship.
- The EO tells the EAC “take all appropriate action to cease providing Federal funds to States that do not comply with the Federal laws”
- The EO orders the Secretary of Defense to update the Federal Post Card Application, to require documentary proof of citizenship for military and overseas voters.
- The EO says that Federal agencies shall assess citizenship prior to providing voter registration forms to enrollees of public assistance programs.
The lawsuit claims that the President cannot compel the EAC, because Congress established it as an independent agency.
Furthermore, the lawsuit claims it negatively affects the EAC and other agencies in that the “Federal Form is enormously important to the complex process of registering voters and administering federal elections.”
Nevada is illustrated as an example of the complexity:
“Nevada registers voters online, by mail, at county clerks’ offices, and at polling locations. It also registers votes at the Nevada Department of Motor Vehicles; certain offices of the Nevada Department of Health and Human Services; the Nevada Department of Employment, Training and Rehabilitation; and U.S. Armed Forces Recruitment Offices. Right now, each agency offers Nevada’s version of the Federal Form, whether on paper or through verbal questions—which workers must be trained to administer.”
In addition, the lawsuit objects strongly to the EAC withholding of funds based on the President’s directives.
Final Thoughts.
RMG Research, Inc. conducted a nationwide poll in January 2025 that shows 50% of the public finds that it is too easy to vote
- 86% favor that proof of citizenship be required to register and to vote.
- 74% require election results to be reported by election night.
These statistics support President Trump’s Executive Order on Elections.
Nevadans elected President Trump in 2024.
The Nevada Attorney General and Secretary of State are engaging in partisan politics by joining this lawsuit and they represent a minority portion of the citizens in our state.
In conclusion, it is important that the Constitutional separation of powers be maintained. It is also important that the laws be implemented and enforced as intended.
The outcome of this escalation could have broad implications on the country’s elections.
Finally, it should be noted that the EO provides other directives that the lawsuit is not addressing, hence they are not mentioned in this article. An example is that foreign nationals can no longer contribute to ballot-initiative-related expenditures.
