EDITORIAL: Nevada Constitution doesn’t mean what it clearly says
As expected, the Nevada Supreme Court last week came to the rescue of the state’s political class. The justices refused to hear an appeal regarding a lawmaker working in two branches of state government at the same time.
The state constitution’s separation of powers clause — intended to prevent the consolidation of authority in too few hands — prohibits anyone serving in one branch of government from carrying out “any function” of another.
State Sen. Heidi Gansert, R-Reno, moonlights as an UNR employee in the executive branch when she’s not sitting in Carson City as part of the legislative branch. Despite a lawsuit alleging the obvious — that she is flouting the state’s founding document — a Washoe County judge dismissed the case.
Now the state’s high court has affirmed that decision.
The issue has been debated for almost two decades, with the Nevada judiciary serving as a compliant toady for the ruling elites. And so, for now, the plain language of the state constitution no longer means what it clearly says.
