When Texas went to the U.S. Supreme Court to disqualify votes for President-Elect Joe Biden, it got backing from Nevada.
Not the Nevada that joined the union in 1864, but New Nevada, a proposed state that would include the rural areas of current Nevada.
Pahrump attorney and New Nevada statehood advocate Robert Thomas III filed the brief last week in support of Texas’ efforts. The Supreme Court declined to hear the case, helping ensure Biden’s election victory.
While the effort by Texas and other states failed, Thomas said New Nevada is "legally formed."
"Yes, we exist," he told KNPR's State of Nevada.
Thomas explained that New Nevada and New California were formed under Article 4, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution.
"The purpose is to restore the federalism, that is republicanism, that is guaranteed in Article 4, Section 4," he said, "And we don't have that."
Thomas explained that a Supreme Court ruling in the 60s ruled that senators represent people, not land, which allowed for more senators from urban areas like Las Vegas and Reno in the State Legislature, changing the balance of power.
Thomas has been friends with the president of New California, Paul Preston, for several years and that sparked him to think about New Nevada.
"When I saw the unfairness of how Clark County treats the rest of the state, much like a 2-year-old demanding their way, then I saw that the solution would be a new Nevada state movement, which I started," he said.
The new state would be made up of Nevada's rural counties and Washoe County, he said. Clark County would be left out entirely.
That would allow the New Nevada to keep a sizable tax revenue base.
There are hurdles to Thomas' plan. One of the first is that the Constitution doesn't allow new states to be carved out of existing states without the consent of the state and Congress.
He is forming committees in each county to lobby for that approval. Thomas would like a resolution to be introduced in the 2023 legislative session.
Thomas was very clear that he and his supporters do not want to secede from the U.S. They want to stay U.S. citizens, but they want to return to representation that was outlined before the 1960s Supreme Court ruling.
Besides the representation issue, Thomas believes Nevadans living in urban areas don't share the same values as those living in rural areas.
"We're very social. We're very volunteer minded," he said, "I find the time I've spent in Las Vegas that many of the people that I come in contact with are very self-centered."
As an example, he said there is not a feeling of community between Elko and Las Vegas. Instead, there is an us-vs-them mentality.
"There's a lot of frustration between those population centers that really don't care about the others in the state and New Nevada and New California solve those issues," he said.
Thomas said since he filed the amicus brief for the Texas lawsuit he has heard of several other movements to split apart states, including New New York, New Illinois, and New Virginia.
He believes dividing the state between rural and urban will defuse some of the divisions and stop violence from boiling over.
As for where the capital of New Nevada will be established, what kind of laws will be passed, and whether it will remain New Nevada - or get a new name, Thomas doesn't know. Instead, he said it will be up to the voters to decide.
"This is not a top-down organization," he said, "It's going to be a bottom-up, and whatever the people vote for, I'm going to salute and go right along with it," he said.
Robert Thomas III, attorney, supporter of "New Nevada"