ACLU Releases Amicus Brief for Nevada Parental Notification Case 

LAS VEGAS – The American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada on Thursday filed an amicus brief with the Nevada Supreme Court arguing for reversal of a Clark County court ruling denying a preliminary injunction against a 40-year-old parental notification statute that was previously found to be unconstitutional and only went into effect in July of this year. ACLU of Nevada attorneys argue that the statute is unconstitutionally vague because it fails to provide a clear process for young people seeking a court order to bypass the statute’s notification requirements. The ACLU is concerned that in failing to provide a clear, consistent process, the statute is guaranteeing young people seeking assistance from Nevada’s courts will receive inconsistent results. Many courts have not developed a process for judicial bypass at this time, and even those that have a process in place are leaving major components up to the individual judges presiding over the bypass request.

Civil rights attorneys for the organization also write that the district court denied the preliminary injunction using the wrong standard and that, under established legal precedent, a statute that was found to be unconstitutional is null and void and can only later become law if passed by the current Legislature, with the constitutional issues cleared up.

ACLU of Nevada legal director Chris Peterson said:

“The 1985 parental notification statute was already struck down under Nevada law. Our courts have been clear that it can’t simply be revived without legislative action that resolves its constitutional flaws. Attempting to enforce it now would inject confusion and fear into a system that should be clear and consistent for all Nevadans. This law not only fails to meet constitutional standards, it creates chaos. Across Nevada, there’s no consistent process for minors seeking judicial bypass, with some counties having procedures, and others not having any. That patchwork denies equal justice and leaves young people without clear guidance or reliable legal representation. Every Nevadan deserves stability and protection under the law. Reproductive freedom isn’t a political talking point, it’s a fundamental right, and we’ll continue defending it. As we build our firewall for freedom, we must protect equal rights.”

ACLU of Nevada staff attorney Samantha Kroner said:

“This is a troubling case with the potential for wide-reaching impacts on Nevadans’ reproductive freedom. The underlying court order being challenged here would allow for continued inconsistencies statewide, as Nevada’s judicial bypass processes differ from county to county, with some courts having no processes in place at all. Nevadans deserve clear, straightforward legal standards that prioritize their freedom and autonomy. People have a right to access health care without the government interfering in their sensitive medical decisions. Our firewall for freedom means that we will always combat efforts to undermine equal rights.”

About the Case

In yet another result of the U.S. Supreme Court’s reversal of the Roe v. Wade decision, in July 2025, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals lifted a permanent injunction against a 1985 Nevada law requiring parental notification for abortion procedures for minors. Planned Parenthood Mar Monte, a nonprofit health care provider, quickly filed litigation to block the notification law from negatively affecting access to abortion care in Nevada.

The appeal before the Supreme Court of Nevada is Planned Parenthood Mar Monte v. State of Nevada, Case No. 91394. It follows a September ruling from Clark County Judge Erika Mendoza denying Planned Parenthood’s request to block the statute.