Plaintiffs claimed Attorney General Aaron Ford’s 2020 tweet made them fearful of prosecution, but judges say social media post was misinterpreted
By Mark Robison, Reno Gazette Journal, April 9, 2025
An attempt to block a Nevada law aimed at protecting election workers from harassment was rejected this week by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.
Plaintiffs Robert Beadles, Alexandrea Slack, Susan Vanness and Martin Waldman had challenged Nevada’s Election Worker Protection Act.
They said they feared being prosecuted under it if they challenged what they believed to be wrongful conduct while observing elections.
The three-judge panel, which heard oral arguments in March, affirmed a 2024 U.S. District Court decision saying they didn’t have standing to bring the case because they hadn’t shown they would be injured by the law.
What the Nevada Election Worker Protection Act does
The election worker protection law — also known as Senate Bill 406 — criminalizes using or threatening to use force, intimidation, coercion, violence, restraint or undue influence with an intent to interfere with or retaliate against elections officials performing elections duties.
The proposal was passed unanimously by the 2023 Nevada Legislature and signed by Gov. Joe Lombardo.
Attorney General Ford’s tweet at heart of lawsuit
A 2020 tweet by Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford played a central role in the lawsuit.
At the time, President Donald Trump urged his supporters to “very carefully” monitor the 2020 election process. Ford described this as voter intimidation and wrote, “If you do it, you will be prosecuted.”
Represented by Las Vegas attorney Sigal Chattah, the plaintiffs alleged this was a specific threat of enforcement.
The 9th Circuit judges rejected this claim.
“The Attorney General could not have threatened plaintiffs with enforcement of SB406 in 2020 because SB406 did not exist in 2020,” they wrote.
“Further, the tweet — at most — threatened to prosecute voter intimidation, not the intimidation of elections officials. Plaintiffs have not alleged any other facts to demonstrate that they face a ‘credible threat of enforcement’ for voicing their disagreement with elections officials. They therefore lack standing.”
The judges also noted that the plaintiffs sued Lombardo and Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar, even though those two do not have the authority to enforce SB406.
Because the lawsuit claims potential injury if the law is enforced, the plaintiffs also do not have standing because they sued the wrong people, the judges added.
Reaction to Nevada Supreme Court ruling
The Secretary of State’s office said it was pleased with the decision.
“Secretary Aguilar will always fight to protect election workers, and is thankful this case was dismissed,” a spokesperson said.
“No one should be harassed or intimidated for supporting our democratic process, and this bipartisan law shows the importance of putting people over politics.”
Chattah did not respond to request for comment.More: Sigal Chattah named interim US attorney for Nevada — Sens. Rosen, Cortez Masto vow fight
Mark Robison is the state politics reporter for the Reno Gazette Journal, with occasional forays into other topics. Email comments to [email protected] or comment on Mark’s Greater Reno Facebook page.