<aside> <img src="/icons/bell_blue.svg" alt="/icons/bell_blue.svg" width="40px" /> Below is general summary of the potential election administration vulnerabilities identified in Nevada.
To read a detailed analysis of the vulnerabilities, intended to help pro-democracy groups protect our elections and fuel corrective action, please click here to request access. Please include the name of your organization in the request.
By requesting access, you’re opting in to receive email notifications when our vulnerabilities research is updated with analyses of additional states.
</aside>
In looking at potential vulnerabilities in the state’s election processes, we have identified a number of areas where, although in spirit the law is sound, the legal framework has created vulnerabilities where someone acting in bad faith could take advantage and subvert or significantly delay post-election processes.
In recent news about threats to not certify votes in Washoe County, it is encouraging that the Secretary of State and the Attorney General are aggressively pursuing legal remedies to bolster election processes against attack, while reaffirming that ministerial duties must be executed without local discretion, and calling out anti-democracy efforts.
These are potential vulnerabilities that should be monitored and defended against, so that they are not exploited by individuals who could pose a threat to free and fair elections.
Concerning findings do not mean an official will seek to undermine the next election, just as a lack of findings is not a guarantee an official will faithfully execute their duties. This research provides guidance on where attention should be focused to ensure that elections are administered properly according to the law. Notably, research showed that the vast majority of local election officials are dedicated public servants, committed to running free and fair elections.
For more information on these officials and counties to monitor this November, see Nevada Election Officials Findings.
Most election procedures in Nevada are prescribed by statute or by the Secretary of State. However, there are a few areas where the law either explicitly provides counties with local discretion or where there is a gap in the law that provides room for that discretion—such as audits of non-VVPAT voting machines.
Although the risks are somewhat reduced by the Secretary of State’s oversight of most areas of county discretion, that discretion can still be problematic, especially when local decisions are influenced by election deniers and conspiracy theorists, with potential issues including:
Counties have discretion to choose to hand count ballots cast, but this typically is more error-prone, more time-consuming, more likely to violate the privacy of voters, and more of a strain on election resources. In 2024, the Secretary of State issued guidelines that attempt to address these problems: a county must submit a hand counting plan to the Secretary of State and must include safeguards to ensure the process does not delay the certification process.
Fueled by conspiracies, election deniers have traveled across Nevada to push for a manual count of an entirely paper ballot system. Officials charged with certifying election results in five Nevada counties considered or voted to conduct hand counts or pursued only using paper ballots in future elections.
The only post-election audit of voting machines required by Nevada Administrative Code is the Voter Verified Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) audit. This is a potential vulnerability because jurisdictions that do not use machines that have a VVPAT attachment are not subject to the uniform standards of the VVPAT audit. Instead, these counties create their own parameters for post-election audits that may or may not be up to the standards of VVPAT audits or other audit methods with recognized best practices.
Certification is non-discretionary in Nevada, with the statute stating that Boards of County Commissioners have no discretion in canvassing and certifying elections and must vote to certify the election no later than 10 days following the election.
This has been supported by legal advice specific to the State of Nevada, including: