Nevada’s chief elections officer opposes letting the executive order proceed
Nevada secretary of state, the state’s chief elections officer
“The Supreme Court’s ruling is another attempt to attack states’ constitutional right to run elections and it’s disheartening to see the justices give this executive order the ability to move forward. This ruling does not address the constitutionality of the executive order and we look forward to continued legal fights to prove that states have the right to run elections as they determine.”
Source and context
Official statement
About this source
Official release from the Nevada secretary of state’s office, dated August 24, 2026. It responds to the earlier Supreme Court order that allowed the executive order to proceed, not to the September 14 denial of the stay.
Before the quotation
The statement responds to the Supreme Court order of August 24, 2026, which allowed the executive order to proceed. It predates both September injunctions and the September 14 denial of a stay.
After the quotation
He added that the midterm election was less than 70 days away and accused the President of spreading falsehoods about mail ballots. That characterisation is his own.
How this statement is classified
Case context: Should Trump’s new mail-in voting restrictions apply to the 2026 midterms?
The label describes this statement’s response within the context above.
Why this label?
Relative to implementing the mandatory USPS ballot-mail requirements for the November 2026 election, Aguilar opposes the requirements and the executive order behind them, and says his office will keep contesting them. He argues states hold the constitutional right to run elections.
- Recorded on
- Published here
Should Trump’s new mail-in voting restrictions apply to the 2026 midterms?
Explore the case context, sources and public responses.
More from this case
Read the full case“Republicans just got another bad decision from the United States Supreme Court ... It is a big loss for Republicans, and America itself.”Read statement
“We have at all times acted within our legal authority to issue a rule to achieve those policies, but ultimately the courts will decide that question, and we will follow the court’s determination. It is that simple.” … “We deliver the mail. Someone else makes the rules. … Once that fight is finished, we’ll do whatever the courts say we can do.”Read statement
“California stood up for democracy and we won”Read statement