The US Supreme Court on Friday rejected the Nevada Green Party’s request to reinstate its presidential candidate, Jill Stein, on Nevada’s 2024 general election ballot. This decision leaves in place a ruling by the Nevada Supreme Court that bars Stein and the Green Party from appearing on the ballot.

The controversy began when the Nevada Secretary of State’s office provided the party with an incorrect petition form that lacked a crucial affidavit. This affidavit was supposed to attest that signature gatherers believed the signers were registered voters in their respective counties. Despite gathering the required number of signatures to qualify for the ballot, the missing affidavit led the Nevada Democratic Party to challenge Stein’s candidacy, arguing that the party submitted flawed paperwork. Although Stein’s campaign asserted that the mistake stemmed from faulty instructions provided by state officials, the Nevada Supreme Court declined to intervene.

In its appeal to the US Supreme Court, the Green Party’s attorney, Jay Sekulow, argued that barring Stein from the ballot violated the party’s constitutional rights to due process and equal protection. He emphasized that the Green Party had followed the directions provided by state officials and should not be penalized for what he characterized as an “unfortunate mistake.”

The Nevada Democratic Party countered, maintaining that the Green Party’s failure to submit the proper affidavit was more than a mere technicality. They argued that the attestation served as a safeguard against fraud and ensured compliance with state election rules. Nevada’s Secretary of State Francisco Aguilar, a Democrat, who had not taken a position in the initial case, later opposed the Green Party’s request to the Supreme Court, citing concerns that altering the ballot at this stage could create confusion and undermine election integrity.

Ultimately, the US Supreme Court, in a brief and unsigned order, declined to vacate the Nevada court’s ruling without recorded dissents. The justices did not provide a rationale for their decision, as is customary in emergency cases.

Following the court’s decision, the Nevada Green Party issued a statement, asserting that they had complied with the Nevada Secretary of State’s instructions and added:

They have removed our ability to “write-in” a candidate of our choice and replaced it with “None of the Above”, which we view as an act of voter suppression. What these people have done is not only shattered the public trust in government entities in this state, but endorsed their misconduct. They have made it more difficult to get a free and fair election in the state of Nevada. We don’t know what you call this, but it’s NOT democracy!

As ballots for military and overseas voters are already being printed and mailed, the court’s decision means Jill Stein’s name will not appear on the Nevada ballot in the upcoming presidential election.