All Cases

3 Court Cases
Court Case
May 07, 2026
Graphic with a green overlay showing students raising graduation caps in celebration. On the left is the white ACLU of Nevada logo. On the right, separated by a vertical white line, the text reads “ACLU of Nevada v. CCSD” in a bold, serif font.
  • First Amendment|
  • +2 Issues

ACLU of Nevada v Clark County School District

As Southern Nevada high school seniors headed toward graduation, many of the students were at risk of having their First Amendment rights violated under a Clark County School District policy adopted in March that added new restrictions on cap and gown decorations and banned objects and adornments that “constitute proselytizing speech.” Our civil rights attorneys say that the policy has led to individual schools creating their own guidelines, which even contradict themselves. The complaint says, for example, that Canyon Springs High School and Del Sol Academy have communicated both that all cap decorations will be banned and that students can adorn their caps with decorations that have religious or cultural significance. Las Vegas High School is going even further and requiring students to submit pictures of decorations and accessories for advanced approval.
Court Case
Apr 25, 2025
Red and blue graphic with the ACLU of Nevada logo and the text ‘Downes-Covington v. City of Las Vegas.’ The background shows a Las Vegas City Marshals patrol vehicle.
  • Smart Justice|
  • +1 Issue

Downes-Covington v. City of Las Vegas

The ACLU of Nevada filed a lawsuit on behalf of Lance Downes-Covington, who was unlawfully stopped and detained by Las Vegas City Marshals. In April 2023, Las Vegas Marshal Sergio Guzman stopped Lance Downes-Covington, citing an alleged traffic code violation. Despite complying with the marshals’ instructions, Downes-Covington was threatened with a handgun and a taser, forcibly handcuffed, and violently slammed to the ground. He was taken to the Las Vegas city jail and then transferred to University Medical Center to be treated for injuries received during the arrest. The charges against Downes-Covington were eventually dismissed. General traffic enforcement falls outside the Las Vegas marshals' jurisdiction, and their actions violated our client’s rights under the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and under Article 1 of the Nevada Constitution. The complaint also alleges civil rights violations for excessive force, prolonged detention, and false arrest and imprisonment. Guzman and the Las Vegas marshals were named as plaintiffs in a separate, unaffiliated civil rights case in March. The Nevada Legislature this year did not move forward a proposed bill to adjust the jurisdiction and authority of municipal agencies such as the Las Vegas marshals. We are seeking an order from the court declaring that the Las Vegas City Marshals office misinterpreted the scope of its authority, as well as monetary damages and attorney fees.
Court Case
Oct 08, 2024
Graphic with a blue overlay showing a close-up of a person’s hand holding prayer beads. On the left is the white ACLU of Nevada logo. On the right, separated by a vertical white line, the text reads “Griffin v. LVMPD” in a bold, serif font.
  • First Amendment|
  • +1 Issue

Griffin v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department

In May 2024, Laura Griffin, a Muslim woman, was forcibly removed from her home by LVMPD during an eviction. While being arrested, Ms. Griffin explained she is Muslim and repeatedly asked for and was denied her religious head covering. During the course of her arrest, transport, and booking, Ms. Griffin requested her head covering over three dozen times. Officers not only ignored her requests but also actively denied her access to her head covering, even when it was brought to the police station by her son. The ACLU of Nevada filed a lawsuit against LVMPD for violating Ms. Griffin’s rights under the U.S. Constitution. In addition to providing damages for the harm caused to Ms. Griffin, the LVMPD adopted policies and provided training to ensure that people who are arrested are afforded religious accommodations and that such mistreatment does not happen again. UPDATE: On February 19, 2025, a settlement was reached and the case was dismissed.