All Cases

4 Court Cases
Court Case
Nov 25, 2025
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
Nov 04, 2025
Graphic featuring the ACLU of Nevada logo on the left and the case title ‘Planned Parenthood Mar Monte v. State of Nevada’ on the right. The background is tinted magenta and shows the Nevada Supreme Court building.
  • Equal Protection|
  • +1 Issue

Planned Parenthood Mar Monte v. Nevada (Amicus)

In yet another result of the U.S. Supreme Court’s reversal of the Roe v. Wade decision, in July 2024, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals lifted an injunction against a 1985 Nevada law requiring parental notification for abortion procedures for minors. Planned Parenthood Mar Monte, a 501(c)3 health care provider, quickly filed litigation to block the notification law from negatively affecting access to abortion care in Nevada. ACLU and ACLU of Nevada argue in a new amicus brief that a lower court ruling used incorrect legal standards. The amicus brief also examines the procedures that are required under the 1985 law, including interviews and court hearings for young people seeking judicial bypass. Such processes differ from county to county, with some courts having no processes in place at all.
Court Case
Sep 26, 2024
Graphic with a red and blue overlay featuring a low-angle view of a courthouse with tall, classical columns. On the left is the white ACLU of Nevada logo. On the right, separated by a vertical white line, the text reads “Spencer v. City of Henderson” in a bold, serif font.
  • Equal Protection

Spencer v. City of Henderson (Amicus)

The ACLU of Nevada and Nevada Attorneys for Criminal Justice filed an amicus brief in Song Spencer & James Spencer v. City of Henderson, urging the Nevada Supreme Court to allow people to recover attorney’s fees as special damages in successful challenges in civil asset forfeiture cases when the government wrongfully seizes their property. Our amicus brief argues that Nevada law already allows recovery of attorney’s fees in cases when warranted, even when there is no law directly on point, and that principle should apply here, when someone is forced to sue the government to get their own property back. This case is a challenge to the constitutionality of civil forfeiture laws.
Court Case
Aug 18, 2020
Graphic with a gold and navy overlay featuring a low-angle view of a courthouse with tall classical columns. On the left is the white ACLU of Nevada logo. On the right, separated by a vertical white line, the text reads “Semper vs. LVMPD” in a bold, serif font.
  • Equal Protection|
  • +1 Issue

Semper, et al. vs. LVMPD

The American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada filed this case on behalf of eleven individuals whose constitutional rights were violated by the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department and the Rio Hotel. On August 19, 2018, our plaintiffs were having a birthday celebration at the Rio Hotel. Each of the 34 guests in attendance that evening is Black. LVMPD, aided by Rio staff, stormed in with no warrant and no reason to believe that any crime was being committed. Despite having no reasonable suspicion, LVMPD officers handcuffed and searched every single guest in attendance. Each guest was made to sit in the hallway of the Rio handcuffed with no access to food, water, or restroom facilities for up to 6 hours. LVMPD alleged that the birthday party was a “gang party,” but no guest was arrested for any criminal gang activity. We’re suing to end LVMPD’s racially discriminatory practice of indiscriminately and unlawfully detaining and searching individuals in violation of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments.