LAS VEGAS — Two of Nevada’s most prominent former elected leaders, one Republican and one Democrat, are declaring that the state’s election system proved its integrity this summer after a sweeping federal claim about noncitizen voting collapsed under review. In a joint statement published by the Democracy Defense Foundation, former Gov. Brian Sandoval and former Assembly Speaker Richard Perkins argued that Nevada’s response to a Department of Homeland Security letter was not a political victory but a demonstration of how election administration should work. The federal government had initially suggested that as many as 15,903 noncitizens were on Nevada’s voter rolls, a figure that triggered national attention and threats of prosecution from the U.S. Department of Justice. Within weeks, however, DHS revised that number down to 185, and then Nevada’s deputy attorney general reviewed every one of those flagged voters individually, finding all of them likely to be U.S. citizens. The result, the two leaders wrote, took the federal claim from 15,903 to 185 to zero — and proved that local election officials closest to the process are best equipped to answer hard questions.
The controversy began in July 2026, when DHS sent a letter to Nevada Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar, a Democrat, asserting that as many as 15,903 noncitizens appeared on the state’s voter rolls. The same week, the Department of Justice sent letters to election officials in all 50 states, raising the specter of criminal prosecution and sending a clear message from Washington that Nevada’s elections were compromised and federal action was warranted. Sandoval and Perkins emphasized that the federal government’s claim did not hold up to scrutiny. DHS soon revised its estimate from 15,903 to 185, acknowledging on a call with Nevada officials that the original number had never been cross-checked against citizenship records and was merely an unverified maximum estimate. Nevada’s deputy attorney general then conducted an individual review of each of the 185 flagged names. The review concluded that all 185 were likely U.S. citizens. The two co-chairs stressed that this outcome was not a partisan win but a clear example of the state’s election system functioning exactly as designed.**
The experience, Sandoval and Perkins argued, holds broader lessons for the country. While the DOJ sent similar correspondence to election officials across the nation, Nevada’s case illustrates that state and local administrators — who know their voters, know their systems, and are accountable to their communities — are best positioned to answer questions about election integrity. The pair were careful not to claim that noncitizen voting is impossible or that Nevada’s election infrastructure is beyond scrutiny. They acknowledged that elected officials and the public have every right to ask hard questions about election security. But they insisted that Nevada took an alarming federal claim seriously, conducted a thorough review, and published its findings. That, they said, is election integrity in practice, not in theory. The transparency of the process, including the individual verification of every remaining flagged voter, allowed the state to provide a factual answer to a serious accusation rather than dismissing it out of hand.**
The leaders pointed to public concern as a reason why the review mattered. According to polling by the Democracy Defense Foundation, 58 percent of Nevada voters were already worried about noncitizen voting before the federal letters arrived. Sandoval and Perkins said those voters deserved a factual answer, and Nevada’s election officials delivered one. The review was thorough, the findings were clear, and the result is now on the public record. They also detailed the safeguards that underpinned the state’s response: applicants are cross-checked against state databases before registration is completed; registering as a noncitizen is a crime; signatures on mail ballots require bipartisan review, meaning one Democrat and one Republican must sign off on every ballot; and chain of custody is documented at every step, from the moment a ballot is issued to the moment it is counted. These safeguards, they wrote, have been in place and working for years, producing results that both parties have accepted and benefited from.**
Sandoval and Perkins went on to describe the mission of the Democracy Defense Foundation, which exists to ensure Nevadans know their elections are secure and to push for greater transparency in vote-counting practices and procedures. They argued that elections hold up only when officials follow the rules, courts enforce those rules, and the public has accurate information. In Nevada over the past few months, they said, all three of those conditions occurred. The foundation’s bipartisan leadership — Sandoval, a former Republican governor, and Perkins, a former Democratic assembly speaker — was itself a signal that election integrity is not a partisan issue. Their joint statement was intended to reassure voters that the system is not dependent on good faith alone, but on verifiable processes and checks that have been tested repeatedly. By documenting the full arc of the federal claim and Nevada’s response, the pair aimed to show what happens when election officials respond to accusations with methodical review rather than political reflex.**
In conclusion, Sandoval and Perkins urged Nevada voters to cast their ballots this election season with confidence and pride in the state’s election integrity. They noted that the system has worked as it has for decades, and that the recent federal claim, while alarming, was resolved through the very procedures designed to protect the vote. The former governor and former speaker framed the episode as proof that Nevada’s decentralized, transparent, and bipartisan system is resilient enough to withstand even the most serious federal accusations. They stopped short of declaring that all election systems nationwide operate with the same rigor, but they argued that Nevada’s experience demonstrates the value of local control and public accountability. “The system worked as it has for decades,” they wrote, “and Nevadans should cast their ballots this election season with confidence and pride in their state’s election integrity.” The statement stands as a bipartisan defense of the state’s election process and a call for continued vigilance, transparency, and trust.