Court Cases

We filed a class action lawsuit, in collaboration with the ACLU and the UNLV Immigration Clinic, against the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), challenging a new federal policy that unlawfully denied immigrants their right to a bond hearing. For decades, people who were living in the U.S. and later detained by immigration authorities were entitled to a bond hearing under federal law. The DHS has now reversed this precedent by reclassifying these longtime residents as “applicants for admission,” thereby stripping them of their right to ask a judge for release. Now, under this new policy, anyone who entered the United States without inspection is detained while their immigration case moves forward without the opportunity for a bond hearing, also known as a custody redetermination hearing. This is a direct attack on due process. People who have lived in Nevada for years are now being held for prolonged periods of time in civil detention facilities without knowing when, or if, they’ll ever see a judge. Our class action seeks to reaffirm the right to a bond hearing for immigrants arrested inside of the United States and prevent them from being unlawfully detained without the possibility of release and in violation of their due process rights.

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.

We filed a lawsuit challenging the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department’s (LVMPD) 287(g) agreement with ICE. That agreement allows ICE to use local law enforcement to assist in carrying out its federal immigration enforcement agenda.

In NYT v. Second Judicial District Court, multiple national media organizations, including The New York Times, CNN, NPR, and others, challenged a Nevada district court’s decision to seal nearly all hearings and filings in a high-profile case related to Rupert Murdoch’s trust. The district court’s ruling directly contradicts the Nevada Supreme Court’s interpretation of the First Amendment right to access civil proceedings found in Falconi v. Eighth Judicial District Court. The ACLU of Nevada, in partnership with Holland and Hart, filed an amicus brief urging the Nevada Supreme Court to reverse the lower court’s decision and affirm the public’s constitutional right to access court proceedings.

Citizen Outreach Foundation seeks to remove over 19,000 registered voters from the Clark County voter rolls ahead of the November 2024 presidential election. The removals are based on National Change of Address (NCOA) data, which they claim shows these individuals are no longer residing at their registered addresses. The ACLU of Nevada (ACLUNV) has filed a motion to intervene in the case, arguing that removing voters based solely on NCOA data violates both federal and state laws, which prevent systemic voter roll maintenance within 90 days of an election. The ACLU also argues that these challenges do not meet the requirements under Nevada law. At least fourteen ACLU members are among the voters being challenged. If the requested relief is granted, thousands of eligible voters could be wrongfully purged from the voter rolls, impairing their right to vote by mail or altogether disenfranchising them just weeks before the election. The organization further asserts that such a decision would set a dangerous precedent, leading to mass, arbitrary voter challenges. ACLUNV seeks to ensure that the voter roll maintenance laws are followed, safeguarding the right to vote for all eligible voters in Clark County.

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.

The ACLU of Nevada, alongside Nevada Attorneys for Criminal Justice, filed an amicus brief asking the court to strengthen due process protections and ensure defendants receive fair trials. In this case, the state made mid-trial disclosures of critical evidence—information that could have helped the defense. The state’s delayed disclosure hindered the defense’s ability to prepare an effective case, and the defendant is now asking that his conviction be reversed due to the state’s failure to meet its legal obligations to disclose evidence in a timely manner. Our amicus brief argues that the convictions should be overturned when delays in the disclosure of evidence violate a defendant’s right to Due Process, as well as when the State, in bad faith, fails to comply with Nevada discovery laws.

ACLU of Nevada, alongside the Campaign Legal Center (CLC), filed an amicus brief asking the court to dismiss a case challenging Nevada's efforts to maintain its voter rolls. The case, Republican National Committee v. Aguilar, was filed against Nevada Secretary of State Francisco Aguilar by The Republican National Committee, the Nevada Republican Party, and a Nevada voter, claiming the state must be violating its obligations under the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) because certain misleading metrics show more registered voters than eligible voters in some counties. The amicus brief explains that the lawsuit is based on deeply flawed and misleading metrics that have been pieced together by unreliable and inaccurate measures of voter registration rates and that have been repeatedly rebuked by federal courts. The voter registration numbers they rely on are taken from a single recent snapshot of the state's voter roll but use an outdated census of the citizen voting age population for comparison. Unfortunately, this lawsuit is just one of several cases recently filed across the country with claims under the NVRA and is part of a years-long pattern to bully states into administering voter roll purges beyond what the law requires. Without proper guardrails, when states rush to purge voters, eligible voters, in many cases, are kicked off the rolls and disenfranchised. These lawsuits are based on false information and only erodes the public's trust and integrity in our elections.

Our client is a prisoner at Florence McClure Women's Correctional Facility in Southern Nevada. She was sexually abused by a prison chaplain, Donald Burse, on two separate occasions in August 2020. While Burse was fired after the abuse came to light, and there is a pending criminal case, we are taking on this case because we believe that the Nevada Department of Corrections has not done enough to make sure that such abuse will not happen again in the future.