FRANCISCO V.

AGUILAR STATE OF NEVADA GABRIEL DI CHIARA

Secretary of State Chief Deputy Secretary of State

RUBEN J. RODRIGUEZ ERIN HOUSTON

Deputy Secretary for Southern Nevada Deputy Secretary for Securities

SHAUNA BAKKEDAHL MARK A. WLASCHIN

Deputy Secretary for Commercial Recordings Deputy Secretary for Elections
OFFICE OF THE
DEBBIE I. BOWMAN SECRETARY OF STATE
Deputy Secretary for Operations

MEMORANDUM

To: Nevada County Clerks & Registrars

From: Mark Wlaschin
Date: August 27, 2024
Subject: Memo 2024-026 – Personal Knowledge

The following guidance is provided to clarify the “personal knowledge” required to challenge to
a registered voter pursuant to NRS 293.535 and NRS 293.547.

I. Written Challenge Statutes

Nevada law permits two forms of written challenge to voter eligibility, one under NRS 293.535,
and the other under NRS 293.547. Both types of challenge require the challenger to attest that
they have personal knowledge of the facts relating to voter eligibility supporting the challenge.

Under NRS 293.535, a challenger may file an affidavit stating either that the registrant (1) is not
a citizen of the United States, or (2) has moved outside the boundaries of the county where they
are registered and established a new residence with the intention of remaining in there
indefinitely and abandoning their previous residence. In either case, the challenger must state
that they have “personal knowledge” of the facts alleged.

To bring a valid written challenge under NRS 293.547, a registered voter must be registered to
vote in the same precinct as the person whose right to vote is challenged and base the challenge
on their personal knowledge.

The Secretary has issued regulations interpreting and implementing NRS 293.547. NAC 293.416
defines “personal knowledge” as used in NRS 293.547 to mean “firsthand knowledge through
experience or observation of the facts upon each ground that the challenge is based.” NAC
293.416(3). This is consistent with the general understanding of the term. “Personal knowledge”
is most commonly understood to be “[k]nowledge gained through firsthand observation or
experience,” distinguishable from secondhand knowledge that is, for example, “based on what
someone else has said.” See Personal Knowledge, BLACK LAW’S DICTIONARY (12th ed.
2024).

NEVADA STATE CAPITOL PAUL LAXALT BUILDING LAS VEGAS OFFICE

101 N. Carson Street, Suite 3 COMMERCIAL RECORDINGS 2250 Las Vegas Blvd North, Suite 400
Carson City, Nevada 89701-3714 401 N. Carson Street North Las Vegas, Nevada 89030-5873
Carson City, Nevada 89701

nvsos.gov
II. Legislative History

Further clarity on “personal knowledge” can be found in the legislative history of prior
amendments to NRS 293.547. First, the legislature amended NRS 293.547 in 1991 through
Assembly Bill 652 (AB 652) to require that a challenge under the statute must be brought either
by a registered voter of the same precinct or district as the challenged voter or on the basis of
personal knowledge. See AB 652 § 29. Comments considered by the Legislative Counsel Bureau
(LCB) suggest the amendment was intended to root out voter challenges based on review of
databases like Department of Motor Vehicles records. Ex. C at 7 to Minutes of the Nev. Legis.
Assemb. Comm. on Legis. Functions & Elections (May 14, 1991) . This commentary notes that
challenges were increasingly filed based on comparison of DMV addresses against voter
registration records, “becom[ing] nothing short of intimidation,” and that the requirement of
“personal knowledge” was meant to preclude challenges based on such comparisons. Id. LCB
described the then-proposed amendment as “restor[ing] the original intent of challenging a voter
based upon personal knowledge that the voter is not qualified to vote.” Id.

Then, in 2007, the legislature amended NRS 293.547 through Assembly Bill 569 (AB 569) to
require that challenges under the statute must both be brought by a registered voter of the same
precinct as the challenged voter and be made on the basis of personal knowledge. See AB 569 §
54. The legislative history indicates that the amendment was intended to rectify the fact that as
then codified NRS 293.547 did not “require the challenger to have any personal or first-hand
knowledge of why he or she is challenging a particular voter.” Minutes of the Assemb. Comm.
on Elections, Procedures, Ethics, & Constitutional Amendments at 3–4 (Apr. 3, 2007) (statement
of Larry Lomax, Registrar of Voters, Clark County). The minutes show the amendment was
written to root out “blind, scattered challenges” and requires firsthand knowledge, knowledge “a
person who, through his own experience, knows . . . to be true[,]” for all challenges under the
statute. Id. at 4. The amendment, therefore, proposed adding “a requirement that a person
actually have knowledge of the person being challenged or the reason the challenge is being
made.” Id.

While “personal knowledge” is not explicitly defined under NRS 293.535 or implementing
regulations, the Secretary views the term to mean the same thing in both statutes. See, e.g. Clark
County Office of the Coroner/Medical Examiner v. Las Vegas Review-Journal, 136 Nev. 44, 61,
458 P.3d 1048, 1061 (2020) (citing Savage v. Pierson, 123 Nev. 86, 94, 157 P.3d 697, 702
(2007) (“[W]hen the same word is used in different statutes that are similar with respect to
purpose and content, the word will be used in the same sense, unless the statutes’ context
indicates otherwise[.]”)). There is no reason to think that the Legislature intended “personal
knowledge” to differ across these two statutes, which are similar in content and context.

III. The National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA)

The NVRA requires, among other things, that a state “conduct a general program that makes a
reasonable effort to remove the names” of voters who may be ineligible based on a change of
residence. 52 U.S.C. § 20507(a)(4). The general program must be “uniform, nondiscriminatory,
and in compliance with the Voting Rights Act of 1965.” 52 U.S.C. § 20507(b)(1). One way to

Page 2 of 3
satisfy the general program requirement is to rely on change-of-address information supplied by
the U.S. Postal Service (NCOA Data). 52 U.S.C. § 20507(c)(1).

A state must complete its general program to remove voters who may have changed residence
“not later than 90 days prior to the date of a” federal election. 52 U.S.C. § 20507(c)(2). This 90-
day blackout period does not apply to removal actions based on individualized information. See
Arcia v. Fla. Sec’y of State, 772 F.3d 1335, 1348 (11th Cir. 2014). The Secretary’s opinion is
that challenges under NRS 293.535 or 293.547 that are based on NCOA data, not “personal
knowledge,” are not based on individualized information.

A state cannot use NCOA Data to inactivate or remove voters during the 90 days before a federal
election through its general removal program, and challenges based on NCOA Data made during
the 90 days before a federal election would open an untenable loophole to the NVRA’s 90-day
blackout period.

IV. Conclusion

Recently, individuals have submitted challenges based on their “personal knowledge” obtained
from their review of data from databases or compilations of information. It is the opinion of the
Secretary of State that such challenges do not meet the requirement of “personal knowledge” of
facts supporting the challenge required by NRS 293.535 and 293.547. As the legislative history
from 1991, noted above, confirms, review of databases and information compilations do not
provide “firsthand knowledge through experience or observation” of the challenged individual’s
eligibility status. County clerks who receive these challenges should reject them and instruct
challengers that personal knowledge gained through firsthand experience or observation of the
facts relating to a voter’s eligibility is necessary to file a valid challenge under either statute. In
the absence of such firsthand, personal knowledge showing a voter’s eligibility, these challenges
should be rejected.

It is worth noting that, even where a challenge is properly raised under NRS 293.535, clerks are
still required to follow the notice and return postcard process required by the National Voter
Registration Act and NRS 293.530. 52 USC § 20507(d); see also NRS 293.535(2) and Memo
2024-006.

If you have any questions regarding this guidance, please contact the Office of the Secretary of
State at [email protected].

Respectfully,

Francisco V. Aguilar
Secretary of State

By: ______________________________
Mark Wlaschin, Deputy Secretary for Elections

Page 3 of 3