Republican National Committee v. Burgess

  • Filed: June 18, 2024
  • Status: Dismissed
  • Court: Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
  • Latest Update: Nov 20, 2024
Graphic with a red and purple overlay showing close-up sections of printed election ballots in English and Spanish. On the left is the white ACLU of Nevada logo. On the right, the text reads “RNC v. Burgess” in a bold, serif font.

Summary

Nevada's "mailbox deadline" allows mail ballots received up to four business days after Election Day to be counted to account for the practical shortcomings of USPS policies and practices. For example, postmarks are not required on all mailings and are designed to prevent reuse of postage, and mail ballot postmarks may become smudged or illegible. To prevent arbitrary disenfranchisement of voters, mail ballots received by 5 p.m. on the third day after election day that are not clearly postmarked by Election Day are still counted.

The Republican National Committee (RNC) claims that this deadline violates federal law because there is only one specific day recognized by federal law as the national election day. We filed an amicus brief asking the court to dismiss the case as Nevada's "mailbox deadline" is a valid exercise of the state's delegated authority over federal elections by the Electoral Count Reform Act, which does not prohibit state laws that allow for timely cast ballots to be received and counted in the days following the election. Furthermore, there are also no federal laws prohibiting or conflicting with Nevada's Mailbox Deadline Laws.

On July 17, 2024, U.S. District Judge Miranda Du dismissed the plaintiffs’ complaint, finding that they lacked standing to sue. The court noted that existing Nevada law governed which ballots were counted in the 2024 election.

Status Update

The plaintiffs have appealed the July ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, where the case is still pending. States United is providing pro bono co-counsel for Secretary Aguilar.

Case Number:
3:24-cv-00198-MMD-CLB
Judge:
Honorable Magistrate Judge Miranda M. Du
Attorney(s):
Sadmira Ramic, Esq., Aseem Mulji Esq., Hayden Johnson Esq.
Pro Bono Firm:
Campaign Legal Center, The Protect Democracy Project

Learn More About the Issues in This Case

Voting Rights View All Issues

Related Content

Court Case
May 03, 2024
Graphic with a reddish-purple overlay featuring documents and a pen, suggesting mail-in ballots or election materials. On the left is the white ACLU of Nevada logo. On the right, the text reads “RNC v. Aguilar” in a bold, serif font.
  • Voting Rights

Republican National Committee v. Aguilar

ACLU of Nevada, alongside the Campaign Legal Center (CLC), filed an amicus brief asking the court to dismiss a case challenging Nevada's efforts to maintain its voter rolls. The case, Republican National Committee v. Aguilar, was filed against Nevada Secretary of State Francisco Aguilar by The Republican National Committee, the Nevada Republican Party, and a Nevada voter, claiming the state must be violating its obligations under the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) because certain misleading metrics show more registered voters than eligible voters in some counties. The amicus brief explains that the lawsuit is based on deeply flawed and misleading metrics that have been pieced together by unreliable and inaccurate measures of voter registration rates and that have been repeatedly rebuked by federal courts. The voter registration numbers they rely on are taken from a single recent snapshot of the state's voter roll but use an outdated census of the citizen voting age population for comparison. Unfortunately, this lawsuit is just one of several cases recently filed across the country with claims under the NVRA and is part of a years-long pattern to bully states into administering voter roll purges beyond what the law requires. Without proper guardrails, when states rush to purge voters, eligible voters, in many cases, are kicked off the rolls and disenfranchised. These lawsuits are based on false information and only erodes the public's trust and integrity in our elections.