LINCOLN — Attorneys for Nebraska’s two major parties and two potential new political parties in court Wednesday got into the weeds of a law meant to stop a candidate or party from deliberately confusing voters.

A Lancaster District Court judge could decide whether the two new parties appear on the fall ballot. 

In their suit against the America First Party, the Nebraska GOP lawyers asked Judge Darla Ideus to give Nebraska Secretary of State Bob Evnen more authority to reject a party or candidate. In a second case, attorneys for the Nebraska Democratic Party and the national Working Families Party sought to compel Evnen to remove the Nebraska Working People Party because its name is too similar to the Working Families Party.

America First Party lawyers argued Wednesday that the law is clear that objections can be made against parties with similar names, but that no other party in Nebraska has “America First” in its name. In the other case, Nebraska Working People Party lawyers contended that only official parties in the state can object to another party. 

Meanwhile, Evnen, a Republican, is arguing through his attorney, Zachary Pohlman, that he should be able to reject the America First Party but not the Nebraska Working People Party because state Democrats objected too late.

The deadline to object was seven days after July 15. His arguments echo the Nebraska Supreme Court’s ruling on the candidacy of former Democratic Senate candidate Cindy Burbank, which overruled Evnen’s decision to remove her because Republicans had filed their objection too late. 

“The idea that somehow the Nebraska Republican Party owns the phrase ‘America First’ or owns conservative issues or conservatism itself is wrong,” Jason Grams, the attorney for the America First Party, said in court Wednesday. 

In its lawsuit, the GOP has called John Cartier’s effort to establish the America First Party as “political sabotage.” They point to his connection to Legal Marijuana Now Senate candidate Mike Marvin and to legal fees he received from Dan Osborn’s 2024 Senate campaign.

Both major-party officials have noted the sponsors of the new parties as grounds for their suspicion. 

State Democratic Party Chair Jane Kleeb has accused U.S. Sen. Pete Ricketts of being behind the effort to establish the Nebraska Working People Party.  

Registered Democrat Robin Richards is the sponsor of the Nebraska Working People Party. She lost as a write-in candidate in Legislative District 12 earlier this year; after her loss, she endorsed incumbent Republican state Sen. Merv Riepe for the general election.

Christopher Dodge, the attorney for both the Working Families Party and the Democratic Party, said their argument is straightforward because of what the law says. He said the Nebraska Working People Party is trying to mislead voters by using the Working Families Party’s decades of “credibility” with voters nationwide. 

But lawyer Dallas Jones, representing the Nebraska Working People Party, argued that only parties registered in Nebraska can object. 

Dodge also challenged Evnen’s reading of the timeline in which someone can object to a party name – saying that he “very conveniently chooses the earliest one, despite its lack of precedential or textual grounding.” Pohlman, Evnen’s lawyer, wrote in a brief that the seven-day deadline to object would start after the last day to turn in signatures for a new party — which was July 15.

The Democratic Party filed its objection Aug. 9. Evnen rejected it on Aug. 11. 

Ideus declined a request to have the cases heard together. Both cases have hearings this week at different times. An emergency injunction delayed certification of both parties until Aug. 20.

This story was published by Nebraska Examiner, an editorially independent newsroom providing a hard-hitting, daily flow of news. Read the original article: https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2026/08/12/judge-hears-arguments-in-cases-challenging-two-new-nebraska-parties/