WMAN

SADMIRA RAMIC, ESQ.

2 Nevada Bar No.: 15984 111..Q
CHRJSTOPHER M. PETERSON, ESQ. FIFl1-IJUDICIALD18TRieT
3 Nevada Bar No.: 13932
SOPHIA A. ROMERO, ESQ.
4 Nevada Bar No.: 12446
urn-4 2022
5
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES Ny county Clerk

. s-,\n----
UNION OF NEV ADA Deputy
6 601 South Rancho Drive, Suite B-11
Las Vegas, NV 89106 at\tt0.f'\ III

7 Telephone: (702) 366-1226

Facsimile: (702) 830-9205
8 Email: ramic@aclunv.org
Attorneys for Petitioners/Plaintiffs
9
FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

11 NYE COUNTYt NEVADA

12 AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF

13
NEV ADA, a domestic nonprofit corporation; and Case No.:C.\JZZ • r.::r.:t:J
3
STEVEN BACUS, an individual,
14 Department: I
15 Petitioners/Plaintiffs, HEARING REQUESTED

16 vs. ARBITRATION EXEMPTION

CLAIMED:
17 The COUNTY OF NYE, a governmental entity; and
18 MARK KAMPF, in his official capacity as interim Equitable and Extraordinary Relief
County Clerk, Requested
19
Res ondents/Defendants.
20
EMERGENCY PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS ENJOINING NYE COUNTY
21 INTERIM COUNTY CLERK FROM IMPLEMENTING PROPOSED UNLAWFUL
22 HAND COUNTING MEASURES DURING THE NOVEMBER 2022 GENERAL
ELECTION AND COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
23
The Petitioners/Plaintiffs, AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF NEVADA
24
("ACLU of Nevada") (collectively referred to as "Petitioners") and STEVEN BACUS, an
25

26 individual, by and through counsel SADMIRA RAMIC, ESQ., CHRISTOPHER M. PETERSON,

27 ESQ., and SOPHIA A. ROMERO, ESQ., of the AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF

Page 1 of 18
 NEV ADA, hereby bring this Petition for Writ of Mandamus (NRS Chapter 34) and Complaint for
1

2 declaratory (NRS Chapter 30) and injunctive relief (NRS Chapter 33). Petitioners are seeking an

3 order prohibiting Respondents/Defendants, the COUNTY OF NYE and interim County Clerk

4 MARK KAMPF (collectively referred to as "Respondents") 1

from implementing its proposed
5
unlawful hand counting process ("Nye County- 2022 General Election Process") which violates
6
both state and federal law. Specifically, Petitioners are requesting that this Court declare that: 1)
7
the verbal announcement of a selected candidate for each race of each ballot prior to the close of
8

9 polls on election day, in the presence of the public, will result in the release of election results in

10 violation of NRS 293.3606 and NRS 293.269935; 2) the limitation of touch screens complying
11 with the Americans with Disabilities Act to individuals with "special needs" does not comply with
12 the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) or Article 2, Section IA of the Nevada Constitution because
13
it impermissibly pennits election workers to enquire about a voter's disability or tum away
14
otherwise eligible voters based on arbitrary decision making; and 3) the use of "stringent signature
15
verifications" violates NRS 293.8874 and NRS 293.277.
16

17 INTRODUCTION

18 On September 6, 2022, the Nye County Clerk's office officially announced that it intended

19 to use paper ballots and hand counting procedures for all ballots during the 2022 General Election.2
20
The announcement indicated that Nye County will "conduct a parallel electronic tabulation of the
21
voted paper ballots along with a hand count of those ballots." The announcement also stated that
22

23
1
24 NRS 12.105State and local governmentalagenciesmay be sued withoutnamingmembersof their governingbodies;
service. Any political subdivision,public corporation,special district, or other agency of state or local government
25 which is capable of being sued in its own name may be sued by naming it as the party without naming the individual
membersof its governingbody in their representativecapacity.In additionto any othermethodwhichmay be provided
by statute or rule of court, service may be made upon the clerk or secretaryof the politicalsubdivision,corporationor
26 agency.
2
Nye County Government Website. Clerk's Office An11ouncesPaper Ballot and Hand Counting Proceduresfor
27 Get1eralElection. https://www.nyecountynv.gov/civicalerts.aspx?aid= 1195.AccessedSeptember20, 2022.

Page 2 of 18
 the hand count process will be performed by "citizen volunteers who are registered voters," and
I
2 that the hand count will be conducted Monday through Friday from October 25, 2022 and

3 continuing through November 10, 2022.

4 In addition to this official announcement, interim Nye County Clerk Mark Kampf gave a
5
presentation to the Nye County Board of Commissioners on September 20, 2022, titled
6
"Presentation regarding the paper ballot and hand-count process to be implemented for the Nye
7
County General Election in November 2022." 3 The presentation, in sum and substance, stated:
8
1. One ADA touch screen will be available at each polling location
9
which will be "limited to those with special needs";
IO
2. "Tabulators (vote counters) [will be] used for all ballots";
11
3. A parallel hand count process will be used;
12
4. The hand count process will be live streamed by video camera;
13
5. The hand count team will consist of a reader, a verifier, and three
14 talliers to tally the results;
15
6. "Stringent signature verifications" will be used including requiring
16 the voter to show an ID if their signature does not match and "no
prompting of voter verification system;" and
17
7. The hand count process, as well as "ADA compliance" listed under
18 number one, are "stop gap measure[s] while researching alternative
solutions." 4
19
During this presentation, Kampf provided further details on the hand count process Nye
20

21 County plans to use during the 2022 General Election and explicitly stated that the process is "very

22 locked in" with no changes to be made. According to Kampf, the counting of ballots will begin on
23 October 25, 2022, and all paper ballots will first be run through a mechanical tabulator. Once the
24
ballots are processed through the mechanical tabulator, all paper ballots will be hand counted. The
25

26 3
Minutes, Nye County Board of County Commissioners Meeting, Sept. 20, 2022.
4
Nye County Board of Commissioners. Nye County Board of Commissioners Agenda.
27 https://www.nyecountyny.gov/DocumcntCcnterNiew/41992/ltcm35.

Page 3 of 18
 hand counting team will conduct the count by having the "reader" read out loud the selected
I
2 candidate for the race from a ballot, the "verifier" verifying that the ballot is being read aloud

3 correctly, and three "talliers" will tally the votes simultaneously. After this process is done for one
4 batch consisting of fifty ballots, the verifier, the reader, and the talliers will check the tallies to
5
determine if they match. If there is a match, all ftve team members will sign off to that effect. If
6
there is a difference, a recount will be conducted on a special recount tally sheet. The process will
7
be open to the public to view in person, and will also be live streamed so "people at home can
8
become poll watchers. " 5
9
10 In light of the presentation and Kampf s statements on September 20'\ several aspects of

11 Kampfs presented process remain unexplained and pose serious legal questions implicating rights
12
guaranteed under both Nevada and federal law. Outstanding questions include: (1) how Kampf
13
intends to define "special needs" to determine who may use the voting machine; (2) who will
14
determine if an individual voter qualifies as having "special needs" under that definition; (3) what
15
are the "stringent signature verifications" the election workers will use when matching signatures
16

17 and deciding whether a voter's ballot will be counted; (4) who will decide when the "stringent

18 signature verifications" are required; and (5) how will the election workers be trained on these
19 "stringent signature verifications".
20
These drastic departures from safe, accurate, and transparent democratic voting processes
21
stem from the Nye County Board of Commissioners' call for the clerk of Nye County to "consider
22
administering the 2022 Primary and General elections using only paper ballots and hand-counting
23
the paper ballots." 6 Nonetheless, the implementation of this process cannot be permitted given that
24

25
26 5
Minutes,Nye County Boardof County CommissionersMeeting,Sept. 20, 2022.
27 6
Minutes, Nye County Board of County CommissionersMeeting,Mar. 15, 2022.

Page4 ofl8
 reading aloud a chosen candidate prior to the close of polls on election day constitutes a release of
1

2 voting results in violation of NRS 293 .3606 and NRS 293 .269935, which not only prohibit such

3 action, but criminalize it. The need for such protections is prominent because release of such
4 information is vulnerable to misinformation and can act as a catalyst to dissuade voters who have
5
yet to cast their ballot from voting based on a possibly false sense that their vote may not matter.
6
Moreover, the limitations placed on voters with disabilities and the use of undefined "stringent
7
signature verifications" violate state law, the Nevada Constitution, and federal law.
8

9 Kampfs proposals are a rushed attempt to circumvent democracy. With just weeks until

10 voting begins, the hand counting process will undoubtedly impede Nye County voters from

11 exercising their right to vote and unravel the election integrity protections currently in place.
12 Petitioners seek mandamus accordingly.
13
PARTIES
14
1. Petitioner/Plaintiff, STEVEN BACUS, is, and was at all times relevant herein, a resident
15
of the State of Nevada, County of Nye, Town of Pahrump. He is a registered voter in Nye County.
16

17 2. Petitioner/Plaintiff, the AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF NEVADA, is a

18 domestic nonprofit, non-partisan organization that works to defend and advance the civil liberties

19 and civil rights of al1 Nevadans operating in the State of Nevada.

20
3. Respondent/Defendant, COUNTY OF NYE, is a governmental entity.
21
4. Respondent/Defendant, MARK KAMPF, is the interim clerk of Nye County and is the
22
primary election administrator for Nye County.
23
JURISDICTION& VENUE
24

25 5. The transactions and occurrences that give rise to the Petitioners' claims against

26 Respondents occurred in Nye County, Nevada.

27

Page 5 of 18
 6. This Court has the authority to grant the writ relief requested herein pursuant to NRS
1
2 34.160.

3 7. This Court has original subject matter jurisdiction over this request for declaratory and
4 injunctive relief under Article 6, Section 6, of the Constitution of the State of Nevada. 7
5
8. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to NRS 13.020 and 13.040 because the cause, or
6
some part thereof, arose in Nye County, Nevada. Additionally, Respondents operate and/or reside
7
in Nye County.
8

9 STANDING

10 9. A petitioner has standing in a proceeding on an extraordinary writ when the petitioner has

11 a "beneficial interest" in obtaining writ relief. "'[A) beneficial interest sufficient to pursue a
12
mandamus action"' is a "'substantial interest that falls within the zone of interests to be protected
13
by the legal duty asserted." 8 In other words, the writ of mandamus must be denied if the petitioner
14
will gain no direct benefit from its issuance and suffer no direct detriment if it is denied. 9
15
10. Petitioner Bacus has standing as a Nye County voter impacted by Nye County's proposed
16

17 policies.

18 11. The citizens of Nye County, including the ACLU of Nevada's members who reside in Nye

19 County, face the imminent risk of having their fundamental rights as voters infringed upon and not
20
having their vote counted. The ACLU of Nevada has standing in this matter because a) its members
21
would otherwise have standing to sue in their own right; b) the interests it seeks to protect are
22
germane to the organization's purpose; and c) neither the claim asserted nor the relief requested
23

24

25
1
See also NRS 30.030 (Unifonn Declaratory Judgments Act).
26 8
Heller v. Legislature of State of Nev., 120 Nev. 456, 460- 61, 93 P.3d 746, 749 (2004) (citing Linde/ti v. Townof San
Anselmo, 111 Cal.App.4th 1099, 4 Cal.Rptr.3d 453,461 (2003)).
27 9
Id. (citing WasteManagement v. County of Alameda, 79 Cal.App.4 1" 1223, 94 Cal.Rptr.2d 740, 747 (2000)).

Page 6 of 18
 requires the participationof individualmembers in the lawsuit.10

2 STANDARD OF REVIEW -MANDAMUS

3 12. Writ relief is an extraordinary remedy, and therefore, it is within the court's sound
4 discretion whether to grant such relief. 11 "Extraordinarywrit relief may be available wherethere
5 is no 'plain, speedy and adequateremedy in the ordinary course of law.",r 2
6
13. However,even when a legal remedy is available, the court can "still entertaina petitionfor
7
writ 'relief where the circumstancesreveal urgency and strong necessity."' 13
8
14. A writ of mandamus may be issued by the court "to compel the perfonnance of an act
9

10 which the law especially enjoins as a duty resulting from an office, trust or station; or to compel
11 the admissionof a party to the use and enjoyment of a right or office to which the party is entitled
12 and from which the party is unlawfullyprecluded by such inferior tribunal, corporation, boardor
13
person," when there is no plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course.14
14
15. The court must examine each request for writ relief individually.15
15
16. The court will generally exercise its discretion to consider an extraordinarywrit wherean
16
17 important legal issue that needs clarification is raised or to promote judicial economy and

18 administration. 16

19
10 "[W]e have recognized that an associationhas standingto bring suit on behalf of its memberswhen: (a) its members

20 would otherwise have standing to sue in their own right; (b) the interests it seeks to protect are germane to the
organization's purpose; and (c) neither the claim asserted nor the relief requested requires the participationof
21 individualmembersin the lawsuit."Hunt v. Washington Stale Apple Advertising Comm '11, 432 U.S. 333, 343, 97 S.Ct.
2434, 53 L.Ed.2d 383 (1977). Greater Birmingham Ministries v. Sec'y of State for State of Alabama, 992 F.3d 1299,
22 1316 (11th Cir. 2021)
11 Segovia v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 133 Nev. 910,911, 407 P.3d 783, 785 (2017).
12 Id. (quotingNRS 34.170 and NRS 34.330).
23 13 Id. (quoting Barngrover v. Fourth Judicial Dist. Court, l 15 Nev. 104, 111,979 P.2d 216, 220 (I 999)).
14
"The writ may be issued by ... a district court or a judge of the district court, to compel the performanceof an act
24 which the law especially enjoins as a duty resulting from an office, trust or station; or to compel the admissionofa
party to the use and enjoymentof a right or office to which the party is entitled and from which the party is unlawfully
25 precluded by such inferior tribunal, corporation,board or person. When issued by a district court or a judge of the
district court it shall be made returnablebefore the district court." NRS 34.160;NRS 34.170.
26 15 Jeep Corp. v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 98 Nev. 440, 443, 652 P.2d 1183, 1185(1982).
16 State Office of the Attorney General v. Justice Court of las Vegas Township, 133 Nev. 78, 80, 392 P.3d 170, 172
27 (2017).

Page 7 of 18
 17. When a petition for extraordinary relief involves a question of first impression that arises

with some frequency, the interests of sound judicial economy and administration favor
2
3 consideration of the petition. 17

4 CLAIMS FOR RELIEF

5 I. WRIT OF MANDAMUS
6
18. Here, there is no plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law.
7
19. There is no other method to challenge the unlawful process of counting ballots in Nye
8
County as presented and described by Kampf.
9
A. The hand counting process violates NRS 293.3606 and NRS 293.269935 as it would
10
reveal election results prior to the time permitted.
11
20. The Nevada Legislature has conferred a duty upon county clerks to follow certain
12
procedures when administering elections.
13

14 21. The Nevada Legislature has set clear mandates regarding the release of election results as

15 well as procedures pertaining to the counting of ballots.

16 22. NRS 293.269925(1)vests the county clerk with the power to establish procedures for the
17
processing and counting of mail ballots.
18
23. NRS 293.269925(2) explicitly states that such procedures must not conflict with
19
293.269935,among other state laws.
20
24. NRS 293.269935 states that no voting results of mail ballots may be released until all
21
22 polling places are closed and all votes have been cast on the day of the election. Any person who

23 disseminates to the public in any way information pertaining to the count of mail ballots before all

24 polling places are closed and all votes have been cast on the day of the election is guilty of a
25
26
17A.J v. Eighth Judicial District Court in a11dfor County of Clark, 2017, 394 P.3d 1209, 133Nev. 202, quoting_Cote
27 H. v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct. ex rel. Cty. of Clark, 124Nev. 36, 175 P.3d 906 (2008).

Page 8 of 18
 misdemeanor.
1
25. Similarly,NRS 293.3606 states that the returns for early voting must not be reported until
2
3 after the polls have closed on election day. Any person who disseminatesto the public information

4 relating to the count of returns for early voting before the polls close is guilty of a gross
5 misdemeanor.
6
26. Both statutes criminalize the disseminationof informationpertaining to the results of the
7
returns before all polling places close on election day and an individual engaging in such actsis
8
guilty of, at minimum, a misdemeanor.18
9
19
10 27. When counting ballots, the process must be conducted in public, open to observation.

11 28. Nevada permits the processing of ballots, in public, prior to election day in only the

12 following circumstances:
13 1. Mail-ballotscan be processed 15days before the day of the election;
14 and20

15 2. the returns for early voting can be counted by the counting board
starting at 8 a.m. on election day.21
16
29. However, Nevada law is clear that the returns of these counts, for both mail-in ballots and
17
22
18 early voting returns, must not be reported until the polls have closed on election day.
19 30. The current process, followed throughoutthe state and the country, uses mechanicalvoting

20 systems, and its processing of ballots prior to the closing of polls on election day complies with
21 both the public counting aspect of the law and not releasing any informationpertainingto the count
22
23
18 See Nev. Rev. Stat.§ 293.269931(3);Nev. Rev. Stat.§ 293.3606(5).
24 19 See Nev. Rev. Stat. § 293.363(1): "When the polls are closed, the countingboard shall prepare to count the ballots
voted. The countingproceduremust be public and continuewithout adjournmentuntil completed."
25 20 Nev. Rev. Stat. § 293.269931.
21 Nev. Rev. Stat. § 293.3606.
26 22 Nev. Rev. Stat. § 293.269931(3):"No voting results of mail ballots may be released until all polling placesare
closed and all votes have been cast on the day of the election";Nev. Rev. Stat.§ 293. 3606(2): "The returns for early
27 voting must not be reported until after the polls have closed on election day."

Page 9 of 18
 prior to the close of polls on election day.
1
31. Compliance with both of these laws can be achieved simultaneously because mechanical
2

3 tabulators are programmed not to produce sums until election night, and the results of the election

23
4 are not printed until the closing of polls on election day.

5 32. As further assurance of compliance with these laws, federal law requires that all voting
6
systems certified to the latest federal Voluntary Voting System Guidelines have the capability to
7
24
process ballots without printing the tallies before polls close.
8
33. Mr. Kampfs current process for hand counting will be public, as required by Nevada state
9
law.25 It involves a reader reading aloud the selected candidate for office, a verifier to assure that
10

11 it is being read correctly and that the tallies are marked correctly, and three talliers to mark a tally

12 for the vote. 26

13 34. However, Kampf s proposed plan does not and cannot comply with all provisions of state
14
and federal law.
15
35. The "reader" verbally stating aloud the elected candidate of a particular office on the ballot
16
will reveal election results prior to the time permitted in violation of NRS 293.269935 and NRS
17

18 293.3606.

19 36. This is because observers of the hand counting will hear the selected candidate, as will

20 viewers at home watching the live stream of the count.

21 37. On the other hand, if Mr. Kampf decided to have the reader simply read the elected
22
candidate to themselves, then such a process would not be considered "in public" as required by
23
NRS 293.363.
24

25 23 BipartisanPolicy Center. "Ballot Pre-processingPoliciesExplained."https://bipartisanpolicy.org/explainer/ballot-

prc-processing-explained/.Accessedon September20, 2022.
26 24 VoluntaryVoting System Guidelines2.0, at 1.1.9-K(2020).
2 sMinutes,Nye County Boardof County CommissionersMeeting,Sept. 20, 2022.
27 26 Jd.

Page 10 of 18
 38. As such, Mr. Kampf s hand counting process violates Nevada state laws. Oddly, these
1

2 proposals also subject the "tally team volunteers" to criminalprosecution.

3 39. Mr. Kampf has acknowledgedthese violations,as it pertains to streaming the hand count

4 live on camera,on the record at the Nye County Board of Commissionersmeeting,but nonetheless
5 determined that it is not an issue because it would be a "monumentaltask for anyone to be ableto
6
figure that out."27
7
B. The limitation of ADA touch screens to individuals with "special needs" violates
8 the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) and Article 2, Section lA of the Nevada
Constitution.
9
10 40. Mr. Kampf s procedures for accessibilityby elderly and disabled voters include one "ADA

11 touch screen" at each polling location,satisfying HAVA's requirementsin that manner.

12 41. However,Mr. Kampf has either failed to take a deeper dive into the requirementsof HA VA
13
or has chosen to ignore them, as the plan's limitation of the ADA touch screen to "those with
14
special needs" violates HAVA's mandate that all voting systems be accessible to individualswith
15
disabilities "in a manner that provides the same opportunityfor access and participation(including
16
privacy and independence)as for other voters."28
17
18 42. Nevada's Constitution provides similar requirements: "Each voter who is a qualified

19 elector under this Constitution and is registered to vote[ ... ] has the right: To equal access to the
20 elections system without discrimination,including,without limitation,discriminationon the basis
21
of race, age, disability,military service, employmentor overseas residence."2930
22
43. In order to limit the touch screens to those with "special needs,"poll workers will inevitably
23
be required to assess whether a voter has such needs by either requesting proof or enquiringthe
24
25 11 Id.
28 42 u.s.c§ 15481.
26 29 Nev.Const. Article 2 § IA(9).
3°Thelanguage of Article 2 § IA(9) of the Nevada Constitution was codified as part of the ''Voter's Bill of Rights"
27 in NRS 293.2546(9).

Page 11 of 18
 voter about their disability.
1
44. It is unclear what Mr. Kampf means when he says "special needs" as the framing of this
2
3 language is not legally operative and is insufficientlyvague.

4 45. To the extent Mr. Kampf is referring to individualswith disabilities, such inquiresviolate
5 the privacy of the voter. Separatingvoters with a disability from those voting on paper ballots,and
6
requiring them to take unnecessary steps to prove they have "special needs" does not create equal
7
access to the elections system as poll workers detennining whether someone has a disability,
8
especiallygiven that many disabilities are hidden, will result in qualified voters being turned away
9

10 at the polls.

11 C. The use of "stringent signature verifications" violate NRS 293.8874 and NRS
293.277.
12
46. The use of more "stringent signature verifications," including "no prompting of voter
13
14 verificationinformation" and "requir[ing] identificationif signatureor verification fails," conflict

15 with the procedure for checking signatures mandated by the legislatureunder NRS 293.8874and
16 NRS 293.277.

17 47. Pursuant to NRS 293.8874, clerks are required to check the signature used for the mail
18 31
ballot against all signatures of the voter available in the records of the clerk.
19
48. If at least two employees in the office of the clerk believe there is a reasonablequestionof
20
fact as to whether the signature used for the mail ballot matchesthe signature of the voter, the clerk
21
22 must contact the voter and ask the voter to confirm whether the signature used for the mail ballot

23 belongs to the voter.32

24 49. Nothing in this section authorizes the clerk to require an identificationcard if the signature
25
26
31 Nev. Rev. Stat.§ 293.8874
27 32 Nev. Rev. Stat.§ 293.8874(1).

Page 12 of 18
 fails.
1
50. In addition to outlining how verification of a signature is conducted, NRS 293.8874 also
2

3 defines "reasonable question of fact," and when a "reasonable question of fact" does not exist:

4 For purposes of subsection 1:

5 (a) There is a reasonable question of fact as to whether the

signature used for the mail ballot matches the signature of the voter
6
if the signature used for the mail ballot differs in multiple,
7 significant and obvious respects from the signatures of the voter
available in the records of the clerk.
8 (b) There is not a reasonable question of fact as to whether the
signature used for the mail ballot matches the signature of the voter
9 if:
(1) The signature used for the mail ballot is a variation of
10
the signature of the voter caused by the substitution of initials for
11 the first or middle name or the use of a common nickname and it
does not otherwise differ in multiple, significant and obvious
12 respects from the signatures of the voter available in the records of
the clerk; or
13 (2) There are only slight dissimilarities between the
14 signature used for the mail ballot and the signatures of the voter
available in the records of the clerk.
15 Nev. Rev. Stat. § 293.8874.

16 51. Pursuant to NRS 293.277, a registered voter can prove their identity, including when an
17 election worker determines that the voter's signature does not match the signature on the voter's
18
application to register to vote, by providing any of the following: 1) the individual's voter
19
registration card; 2) a driver's license; 3) an identification card issued by the Department of Motor
20
Vehicles; 4) a military identification card; or 5) any other form of identification issued by a
21

22 governmental agency which contains the voter's signature and physical description or picture.

23 52. To the extent that Mr. Kampf requires the registered voter to provide a Nevada

24 identification card only, such a requirement would violate NRS 293.277.

25
53. Mr. Kampf s verification process is vague and does not provide explanations as to what
26
"stringent signature verifications" entails.
27

Page 13 of 18
 II. DECLARATORYJUDGMENT
1
54. Altematively, 33 under the Nevada Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act, NRS 30.010 to
2

3 30.160, this Court has the power to declare the rights, status and other legal relations of the parties

4 whether or not further relief is or could be claimed, and a declaration may be either affirmative or

5 negative in form and effect, and such declarations have the force and effect of a final judgment or
6
decree. 34
7
55. More specifically, with respect to contracts, statutes, and other writings, NRS 30.040(1)
8
provides:
9
10 Any person interested under a deed, written contract or other
writings constituting a contract, or whose rights, status, or
11 other legal relations are affected by statute, municipal
ordinance, contract or franchise, may have determined any
12 question of construction or validity arising under the
instrument, statute, ordinance, contract or franchise and
13 obtain a declaration of rights, status or other legal relations
14 thereunder.

15 56. The provisions of the Act are to be liberally construed and administered, and are intended

16 to be remedial, in order to settle and to afford relief from uncertainty and insecurity with respect
17 35
to rights, status and other legal relations.
18 36
57. Such declarations have the force and effect of a final judgment or decree.
19
58. This matter satisfies the four elements that must be met for declaratory relief to be granted,
20
as described below. 37
21

22 59. The facts stated above herein reveal a justiciable controversy in which a claim of right is

23 asserted against one who has an interest in contesting it.

24

25 33 See NRCP 8(a)(3).

34 See NRS 30.030.
26 35 See NRS 30.140.
36 NRS 30.030.
27 37 Kress v. Corey, 65 Nev. I, 25-26, 189 P.2d 352,364 (1948).

Page 14 of 18
 60. The controversyis between persons whose interests are adverse.
1
61. Steven Bacus bas a legally protectableinterest in the controversy.
2
3 62. The ACLU of Nevada, specifically its Nye County membership,has a legally protectablc

4 interest in the controversy.

5 63. The issue involved in the controversy is ripe for detennination as Kampf has repeatedly
6
stated that the electionprocess describedherein is final and will be implementedfor the November
7
2022 election.
8
64. Petitionershereby incorporateparagraphs20- 53, above, as if fully set forth herein.
9
10 65. As such, Petitionersare requesting that this Court declare that: 1) the verbal announcement

11 of a selected candidate for each race of each ballot prior to the close of polls on election day,in
12 the presenceof the public, will result in the release of electionresults in violation ofNRS 293.3606
13 and NRS 293.269935;2) the limitationof ADA touch screens to individualswith "special needs"
14
does not comply with the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) or Article 2, Section IA of the Nevada
15
Constitutionbecause it impennissibly permitselection workersto enquireabout a voter's disability
16
or tum away otherwise eligible voters based on arbitrary decision making; and 3) the use of
17
18 "stringent signature verifications"violates NRS 293.8874 and NRS 293.277.
19 111.. INJUNCTIVERELIEF
20 66. Injunctive relief is a historical equitable remedy that has been codified in Nevada lawat
21
NRS 33.010.
22
67. NRS 33.010 states that an injunctionmay be granted:
23
When it shall appear by the complaint that the plaintiff is
24 entitled to the relief demanded, and such relief or any part
thereof consists in restraining the commission or
25
continuance of the act complained of, either for a limited
26 period or perpetually.

27

Page 15 of 18
 When it shall appear by the complaint or affidavit that the
commission or continuance of some act, during the
2 litigation, would produce great or irreparable injury to the
plaintiff.
3
When it shall appear, during the litigation, that the defendant
4 is doing or threatens, or is about to do, or is procuring or
suffering to be done, some act in violation of the plaintiff's
5
rights respecting the subject of the action, and tending to
6 render the judgment ineffectual.

7 68. As discussed above, Petitioners/Plaintiffs are entitled to relief regarding the unlawful

8 processes for the November 2022 election and do not have other adequate remedies at law.
9
69. Failing to grant injunctive relief will cause irreparable injury to Petitioners/Plaintiffs
10
because as registered voters of Nye County, the "hand counting process for the general election in
11
November 2022" will undeniably impede their right to vote and their right to have the results of
12
the election not be released prior to the close of polls on election day.
13

14 70. This violation is impossible to remedy after the election.

15 71. Petitioners/Plaintiffs request injunctive relief, preventing Nye County from implementing

16 the "Nye County- 2022 General Election Process" and to utilize the same procedures used during
17
the November 2020 general election or the June 2022 primary election.
18
REQUESTFOR RELIEF
19
WHEREFORE, Petitioners, Steven Bacus and the ACLU of Nevada ask for the following relief:
20

21 A. A Writ of Mandamus finding that: 1) the verbal announcement of a selected candidate

22 for each race of each ballot prior to the close of polls on election day, in the presence

23 of the public, will result in the release of election results in violation of NRS 293.3606
24 and NRS 293.269935; 2) the limitation of ADA touch screens to individuals with
25
"special needs" does not comply with the Help America Vote Act (HA VA) or Article
26
2, Section IA of the Nevada Constitution because it impermissibly permits election
27

Page 16 of 18
 workers to enquire about a voter's disability or tum away otherwise eligible voters
1
based on arbitrary decision making; and 3) the use of"stringent signature verifications"
2

3 violates NRS 293.8874 and NRS 293.277.

4 B. All equitable declaratory relief and/or statutory declaratory relief that arises from or is

5 implied by the facts, whether or not specifically requested, including but not limited to
6
a declaration that: 1) the Petitioners/Plaintiffs are enti tied to writ/injunctive relief; 2)
7
the verbal announcement of a selected candidate for each race of each ballot prior to
8
the close of polls on election day, in the presence of the public, will result in the release
9
of election results in violation ofNRS 293.3606 and NRS 293.269935; 3) the limitation
IO
11 of ADA touch screens to individuals with "special needs" does not comply with the

12 Help America Vote Act (HA VA) or Article 2, Section lA of the Nevada Constitution

13 because it imperrnissibly pennits election workers to enquire about a voter's disability

14
or tum away otherwise eligible voters based on arbitrary decision making; 4) the use
15
of "stringent signature verifications" violates NRS 293.8874 and NRS 293.277; and 5)
16
Mark Kampf must not conduct the November 2022 general election using the "Nye
17

18 County- 2022 General Election Process."

19 C. All equitable injunctive relief that arises from or is implied by the facts, whether or not

20 specifically requested, including an injunction enjoining and prohibiting Mark Kampf

21
from implementing the "Nye County- 2022 General Election Process".
22
D. Award Petitioners their reasonable attorney's fees and costs incurred in this action as
23
provided by NRS 18.010; and
24
E. Such other and further relief as the court deems just and equitable.
25

26

27

Page 17 of 18
 Dated this 4 1hday of October 2022.
1
This documentdoes not contain the Social Security
2 number of any person. Pursuant to NRS 53.045,I
3 declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing
is true and correct.
4
AMERICANCIVILLIBERTIES
5
ttfmNOF,NJ!,VA~t, -.
6 ~•CL-/ - -
(,SADMIRA RAMIC, ESQ.
7 Nevada Bar No. 15984
CHRISTOPHERM. PETERSON,ESQ.
8 Nevada Bar No. 13932
9 SOPHIA A. ROMERO,ESQ.
Nevada Bar No.: 12446
10 601 South Rancho Drive, Suite B-11
Las Vegas, NV 89106
11 Telephone: (702) 366-1226
Facsimile:(702) 366-1331
12
Email: ramic@aclunv.org
13 Attorneys for Petitioners/Plaintiffs

14

15
16

17

18
19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

Page 18 of 18