Hey Nevada, let’s talk about what just happened in the Nevada Supreme Court. You may not think a court decision about dual public employment and legislative duties would matter to your day-to-day, but it absolutely does. Imagine your workplace suddenly decides that some employees get to write the company rules while also enforcing them and collecting two paychecks for their troubles. Would that feel fair? Would you trust those rules? This is what dual service can do to the trust Nevadans have in their representatives. So, the results of this case matter, a lot. 

A Win for Constitutional Integrity (and You) 

First, let’s get one thing straight: this ruling was a win. It was won against legislators who, for too long, straddled a gray line by holding positions that allowed them to act as both a lawmaker and a public employee.  

Think of it like a referee trying to coach a team at the same time—how fair would that game be?  

The Supreme Court laid down the law by making it clear that certain types of dual public service are indeed problematic. 

Now the ruling covered the four legislators named in the case who were not violating the state constitution. But there’s a twist in this tale. Despite this ruling, the court’s less than swift process let one key legislator from the original lawsuit a decade ago slip through the cracks. And while that legislator has gotten away with double dipping, we can rest assured that any future candidates will not be able to take advantage of Nevadans and must undergo scrutiny before they can even serve the public. 

Leaning on Case Law: When the Rulebook Takes a Backseat 

The court’s decision leaned heavily on past case law instead of what’s right there in black and white in our state constitution. And when you ignore the main rulebook in favor of prior rulings, it’s like basing your final exam answers on what you heard in class instead of studying the textbook. Sure, you might get some right, but at what cost? 

The constitution of Nevada says it loud and clear: we only have three branches of government—legislative, executive, and judicial. But over time, a sort of unofficial “fourth branch” has emerged. With nested bodies like the Nevada System of Higher Education (NSHE) and others forming a complex web within state operations, and in doing so makes the government harder to navigate and less accountable. 

The court’s decision to address potential violations on a “case-by-case” basis instead of setting clear, constitutionally grounded standards only adds to this mess. It’s like telling someone to clean up a huge spill one drop at a time—exhausting, ineffective, and missing the point. The result? The judicial system gets bogged down in endless lawsuits, and real solutions get delayed. 

Cementing a Stronger Future 

But here’s where the win shines through with this decision now cemented as precedent, future candidates will know that trying to double-dip in public service isn’t going to fly. The days of sidestepping constitutional rules by way of technical loopholes are (hopefully) numbered. This ruling has sent a clear message: if you want to serve Nevada as a lawmaker, you can’t hold another public job that blurs the lines of your responsibilities. And that, my friends, is good news for all of us and worth paying attention to.