November 6, 2020
Carson City, NV – Today, the Nevada Attorney General’s Office filed a Response to a
Motion for Preliminary Injunction in a new lawsuit regarding Nevada's election.
While the lawsuit was announced yesterday at 8:30am, Plaintiffs did not file
the "emergency" lawsuit for nearly 12 hours. Plaintiffs requested a
Temporary Restraining Order against the use of a ballot machine used in
Clark County, among other items. While it repeats several of the same claims,
this suit is a separate action previously denied by Nevada's First
Judicial District Court Judge James Wilson.
"While the Attorney General's Office normally does not
comment on pending litigation, I feel compelled to dispel the
misinformation being circulated to undermine the public's trust in our
election,” said AG Ford. “To all Nevada voters: rest assured that
the State of Nevada takes its responsibility to voters seriously, and is
using every available resource to ensure the safety and security of this
election. Courts have already found no evidence of fraud. Nevada's
election officials will count all legal votes, as is the normal course of
action in every election.”
In the Complaint, Plaintiffs made a variety of unsubstantiated
claims without a shred of evidence, most of which have already been brought
before a court in this state, examined, and found meritless.
Specifically, the Response states
these allegations are "absurd and must be rejected by this
court."
- Plaintiff
Stokke's allegation was previously independently investigated by the
Secretary of State’s Office. Plaintiff Stokke refused to affirm that she
had not submitted the mail ballot in writing to receive a provisional
ballot and refused to challenge the ballot in question. Our Office filed
the investigation report with the Court in this matter.
- Plaintiff
Prudhome, who states he was acting simultaneously as an observer for
the Trump Campaign and a credentialed member of the media, alleges he was
not permitted to take photos of ballot counting. By law, only a registered
Nevada voter may request photos or recordings of ballot counting. A court
in this state has already determined that Clark County procedures allow
for the lawful observation of the ballot counting.
- Plaintiffs
provided no evidence of any voter fraud or inaccuracies with ballot
counting machines. As addressed in the state court matter, the Agilis
machine conducts an initial review of signed ballots, matching signatures
approximately 30% of the time. The state district court, following a
day-long evidentiary hearing, found “[n]o evidence was presented of any
Agilis errors or inaccuracies.” Ex. B at 4:14. “No evidence was presented
that there is any indication of any error in Clark County’s Agilis
signature match rate.” Id. at 4:14-16. The remaining 70% proceed through a
detailed human review process that complies with Nevada law and has not
been challenged by Plaintiffs in this case. Plaintiffs continue to
recycle these claims and fail to produce proof to the
court.
Judge Andrew P. Gordon of the
United States District Court, District Court of Nevada, will hear plaintiffs'
motion for temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction in a
telephonic hearing today, 11/6/2020, at 2:00 p.m. PST.
###