One of the biggest differences between the constitutions of Nevada and the United States is that Nevada allows for direct democracy where the voters can propose their own laws and amendments, nullify legislative actions, and recall elected officials. Critics of the process contend that it is another way for interests groups and those with lots of resources to further influence the policy making process. Do you think direct democracy is a "good" idea? Why or why not? Be sure to address how the process has been used in Nevada. Would this same process work at the federal level and help to bypass partisan gridlock on some issues? Why or why not? If it was used nationally should the Supreme Court be able to nullify the voters’ will?

Nevada's Supreme Court's primary duties are to consider cases involving the Constitutionality and legality of laws approved by the legislative branch and governor. Also the application of those laws and the interpretation of laws when required. The Supreme Court is also responsible for appeals from rulings of the district courts because Nevada has no appellate court.

Why is direct democracy is a good option?

Yes, direct democracy is a good option nas it gives the people the freedom to take the dicisions and help government in making the decisions.
The word democracy means giving the citizens the rights to make decisions and get involved in the decision making.
In Nevada the idealogy did not support the idea of direct democracy and had presidential powers.
No the same couldn't work for the partisan gridlock as they always wanted to save their democracy.
No the supreme court couldn't nullify the voters will.

To learn more about Nevada refer :

https://brainly.com/question/1047827

#SPJ2