Steimer

MEMORANDUM **

Richard Olsen Steimer appeals from the district court’s denial of class certification and dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim. Steimer argues that Nev. Rev.Stat. 233B.150 (2004), which permits the Nevada Supreme Court to hear appeals from state district courts, improperly amends Nev. Const, art. 6, § 6, which grants state district courts “final appellate jurisdiction” over appeals from administrative proceedings. Because Nev. Const, art. 16, § 1 provides that constitutional amendments must be “submitted] ... to the people,” Steimer contends that the Nevada Supreme Court, by exercising jurisdiction pursuant to Nev.Rev.Stat. 233B.150, deprived him of liberty and property interests protected under the federal Due Process Clause and infringed the federal voting rights of all Nevada voters.

The district court dismissed on the ground that it “lacked jurisdiction to overturn the Nevada Supreme Court ruling in [Dep’t of Motor Vehicles v. Bremer, 113 Nev. 805 , 942 P.2d 145 (1997)] pursuant to *530 the Rooker-Feldman doctrine.” We decline to affirm based on Rooker-Feldman. We affirm on the alternative ground that Steimer has failed to state a claim. The Nevada Supreme…