Connect with us

Nevada

Nevada Supreme Court rules Green Party will not be on the state’s general election ballot

Published

on

Nevada Supreme Court rules Green Party will not be on the state’s general election ballot


The Nevada Supreme Court has ruled 5-2 that Nevada Green Party candidate Jill Stein will not appear on the state’s presidential ballot because their petition failed to meet the minor party’s access requirements.

The Nevada Democratic Party filed a lawsuit in June against the Nevada Green Party for alleged invalid signatures.

The Green Party submitted 29,500 petition signatures so its candidates could be included on the ballot, which was roughly three times as many as needed. Nevada Democratic Party then sued, claiming some were signed too far in the past or seem altered, making them invalid.

The district court in Carson City denied the lawsuit in August. The Democrats amended the original lawsuit because the language used the improper affidavit. The case was then taken to the Nevada Supreme Court.

Advertisement

The state Supreme Court reversed the lower court’s ruling to allow the Green Party to stay on the Nevada general election ballot. According to the court documents, the petition contained the “circulator affidavit for initiative and referendum petitions, instead of the circulator affidavit for minor party ballot access” which is what the Nevada Democratic Party amended their lawsuit to say.

The problem: The Green Party submitted the petition that does not swear that they believe each person signing the petition is a registered voter in the county of their residence. In order to be added to the ballot, all minor parties must include this verification. The Green Party did not, so the Nevada Democratic Party added this to their lawsuit and the Nevada Supreme Court ruled to not let them on the ballot for not meeting all requirements.

“The circulator affidavit used by the Nevada Green Party omitted a legally required element: the attestation that each signatory was a registered voter in the county of his or her residence,” the document said.

However, Justices Douglas Herndon and Justice Kristina Pickering voted against the ruling, saying they believed the Nevada Secretary of State’s Office made an “egregious error” when they accidentally sent the Green Party an affidavit with the incorrect requirements.

Advertisement

The secretary of state’s office originally sent the Nevada Green Party the wrong sample petition, which did not include the affidavit requiring voter registration verification, according to the documents. With the wrong affidavit, the Green Party’s petition would not meet the requirements of a minor political party to be on the ballot.

The party still managed to submit the petition with the right affidavit the first time, by not using the same form the secretary of state’s office provided them. However, this petition did not include a blank space for signers to put their petition district, so the office sent it back and notified the Nevada Green Party that they needed the petition district, and emailed the party new instructions.

The employee who provided the Green Party with further guidance told them they had an “older version,” according to the dissenting judges’ opinion. The employee asked the Green Party to use this “newer” form — with the wrong affidavit — to collect signatures.

The dissenting justices claim the Nevada Green Party was “affirmatively directed” by the secretary of state’s office to use this incorrect form because the employee told them to use the wrong form.

Still, the secretary of state’s online guide for minor political parties to apply to be on the ballot states the petition needs the verification that signatures are from people who are actual registered voters. So even without the proper affidavit, the state supreme court ruled that they should’ve done their research into what was required for them to be on the ballot.

Advertisement

The court acknowledged the miscommunication of improper materials on the behalf of the secretary of state’s office, but classified the situation as an unfortunate event that could’ve been remedied with a more in-depth review.

“There is no evidence that the email was anything but an unfortunate mistake or that the (s)ecretary intended to mislead the Green Party,” the documents said.

“If the Green Party had reviewed the petition before using it, it would have discovered the incorrect circulator affidavit …This is an unfortunate oversight on the part of both the secretary of state’s office and the Green Party.”

Herndon and Pickering said they believed the secretary of state’s office’s mistake would be the result of a “tremendous injustice.”

The secretary of state’s office told the RGJ in an email that they took “no position” on whether the Green Party’s petition was legal.

Advertisement

“We respect the decision of the Justices, and are working with the counties to ensure the decision is carried out,” Cecilia Heston, spokesperson for the secretary of state’s office, said.

“Providing accurate information to the public is a priority for our office, and we will continue to review and improve all guides and documentation.”

The last time Green Party had any candidates on the Nevada ballot was in the 2008 presidential election, when Cynthia McKinney received about 1,400 votes compared with Democratic nominee Barack Obama’s 532,000.

Co-chair of the Nevada Green Party Margery Hanson told the RGJ due to the court events today, she “would not be voting this cycle.”

The Nevada Democratic Party did not respond to the RGJ’s request for comment.

Advertisement



Source link

Nevada

Oregon lands commitment from Nevada punter

Published

on

Oregon lands commitment from Nevada punter


Oregon has found its next Australian punter.

Bailey Ettridge, who averaged 44.66 yards on 47 punts at Nevada this season, committed to transfer to the Ducks on Sunday. He has three seasons of eligibility remaining.

From Lara, Australia, Ettridge had 15 punts over 50 yards and 18 inside opponents’ 20-yard lines this season. He also had two carries for 26 yards, both of which converted fourth downs.

Ettridge replaces James Ferguson-Reynolds, who is averaging 41.64 yards on 33 punts for UO this season. Ferguson-Reynolds and Ross James are both out of eligibility after the season.

Advertisement

Ettridge is the first scholarship transfer to Oregon this offseason and his addition gives the Ducks 81 projected scholarship players in 2026. He is the lone punter presently on the roster.



Source link

Continue Reading

Nevada

‘Winnemucca Day’ helps fuel Backus, Wolf Pack to 58-40 win over Utah State

Published

on

‘Winnemucca Day’ helps fuel Backus, Wolf Pack to 58-40 win over Utah State


RENO, Nev. (Nevada Athletics) – Nevada Women’s Basketball returned to Lawlor for the first game of 2026, hosting Utah State.

The Pack picked up its first conference win of the season with the 58-40 victory over the Aggies.

Freshmen showed out for the Pack (5-9, 1-3 MW) with Skylar Durley nearly recording a double-double, dropping 12 points and grabbing nine rebounds. Britain Backus had five points to go along with two rebounds and a season high four steals.

Junior Izzy Sullivan also had an impactful game with 17 points, going 6-for-11 from the paint and grabbing five boards. She also knocked down Nevada’s only two makes from beyond the arc, putting her within one for 100 career threes.

Advertisement

The Pack opened up scoring the first four points, setting the tone for the game. It was a close battle through the first 10 as Utah State (6-7, 2-2 MW) closed the gap to one.

However, Nevada never let them in front for the entire 40 minutes.

Nevada turned up the pressure in the second quarter, holding Utah State to a shooting drought for over four minutes. Meanwhile, a 5-0 scoring run pushed the Pack to a 10-point lead.

For the entire first 20, Nevada held Utah State to just 26.7 percent from the floor and only nine percent from the arc, going only 1-for-11.

For the Pack offense, it shot 48 percent from the paint. Nevada fell into a slump coming out of the break, only scoring eight points.

Advertisement

It was the only quarter where the Pack was outscored.

The fourth quarter saw the Pack get back into rhythm with a 6-0 run and forcing the Aggies into another long scoring drought of just under four and a half minutes.

Durley had a layup and jumper to help with securing the win.

Nevada will remain at home to face Wyoming on Wednesday at 6:30 p.m.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Nevada

EDITORIAL: Nevada’s House Democrats oppose permitting reform

Published

on

EDITORIAL: Nevada’s House Democrats oppose permitting reform


Politicians of both parties have promised to fix the nation’s broken permitting system. But those promises have not been kept, and the status quo prevails: longer timelines, higher costs and a regulatory maze that makes it nearly impossible to build major projects on schedule.

Last week, the House finally cut through the fog by passing the Standardizing Permitting and Expediting Economic Development Act. As Jeff Luse reported for Reason, the legislation is the clearest chance in years to overhaul a system that has spun out of control.

Notably, virtually every House Democrat — including Reps. Dina Titus, Susie Lee and Steven Horsford from Nevada — opted for the current regulatory morass.

The proposal addressed problems with the National Environmental Policy Act, which passed in the 1970s to promote transparency, but has grown into an anchor that drags down public and private investment. Mr. Luse notes that even after Congress streamlined the act in 2021, the average environmental impact statement takes 2.4 years to complete. That number speaks for itself and does not reflect the many reviews that stretch far beyond that already unreasonable timeline.

Advertisement

The SPEED Act tackles these failures head on. It would codify recent Supreme Court guidance, expand the projects that do not require exhaustive review and set real expectations for federal agencies that too often slow-walk approvals. Most important, it puts long-overdue limits on litigation. Mr. Luse highlights the absurdity of the current six-year window for filing a lawsuit under the Environmental Policy Act. Between 2013 and 2022, these lawsuits delayed projects an average of 4.2 years.

While opponents insist the bill would silence communities, Mr. Luse notes that NEPA already includes multiple public hearings and comment periods. Also, the vast majority of lawsuits are not filed by members of the people who live near the projects. According to the Breakthrough Institute, 72 percent of NEPA lawsuits over the past decade came from national nonprofits. Only 16 percent were filed by local communities. The SPEED Act does not shut out the public. It reins in well-funded groups that can afford to stall projects indefinitely.

Some Democrats claim the bill panders to fossil fuel companies, while some Republicans fear it will accelerate renewable projects. As Mr. Luse explains, NEPA bottlenecks have held back wind, solar and transmission lines as often as they have slowed oil and gas. That is why the original SPEED Act won support from green energy groups and traditional energy producers.

Permitting reform is overdue, and lawmakers claim to understand that endless red tape hurts economic growth and environmental progress alike. The SPEED Act is the strongest permitting reform proposal in years. The Senate should approve it.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending