Court Cases

The ACLU of Nevada filed a lawsuit challenging Nevada's ban on Medicaid coverage for abortion, which discriminates against women and people who can become pregnant based on their sex in violation of the protections voters added to the Nevada Constitution. Following the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade last year, Nevadans turned out to the polls to overwhelmingly adopt an Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) to the state constitution, ensuring equality under the law regardless of race, sex, gender, sexual orientation, and more. The lawsuit brought by Silver State Hope Fund — a Nevada nonprofit that offers financial assistance to help people pay for abortion, as well as travel, lodging, and childcare to ensure they can access care — challenges the state’s Medicaid coverage ban as a violation of Nevada’s ERA. The majority of Silver State’s clients have incomes that qualify for Medicaid. Nevada’s Medicaid program, managed by the Division of Health Care Financing and Policy, has set a mission to ensure equal access to health care by providing quality medical care for low-income individuals and families who otherwise may not be able to afford health care. Despite that mission, the program specifically denies coverage for abortion, and so the majority of Silver State Hope Fund’s clients cannot get full coverage for their reproductive health care needs. The abortion coverage ban reinforces sex-based inequalities by denying only women and those who can become pregnant the ability to make decisions about their health care options and reproductive futures. There are no similar restrictions on care typically accessed by men. The lawsuit requests that the state court order the Nevada Division of Health Care Financing and Policy to remove the abortion coverage ban in Nevada’s Medicaid program.

In this joint filing by the ACLU of Nevada and Nevada Attorneys for Criminal Justice, we argue that the state can't make it harder for people working toward rehabilitation to reenter society by imposing excessive fines and fees if they are already meeting the requirements of their parole. The Nevada Division of Parole and Probation recommends early discharge from parole if a supervised person meets all the conditions in state law. One condition requires the person to be current with the supervision fees required by probation or parole. A Clark County Court found that the subject of this case, Valentine, fulfilled this condition and had proven he experienced economic hardship and was eligible for relief. On appeal, the state claims that Valentine was ineligible for early discharge because he had not paid off the entire balance of supervision fees. No one disputes that Valentine paid his fees on time, but the parole agency diverted those payments to cover his outstanding restitution balance instead. In the amicus brief, we pointed out that: State law only requires a person to be current with supervision fee payments, not that they are paid them off in full. The Division of Parole and Probation has no legal basis to transfer a person's supervision fees to restitution. There was no court order and no statute authorizing the agency to do it.

The ACLU of Nevada is representing seven incarcerated firefighters who were badly burned while working as wildland firefighters as part of a program in which the Nevada Division of Forestry and the Nevada Department of Corrections press incarcerated people into dangerous service on behalf of the state. The case is Leavitt v. Nevada, Case No. A-23-867730-C, and it was filed in Clark County.

On Oct. 4, 2022, the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada filed a lawsuit against Nye County to prevent the county from moving forward with its proposed unlawful hand-counting scheme during this year’s elections. We are representing Nye County voters who risk having their freedom to vote suppressed by the county’s proposed procedures for this year’s election. The case is ACLU of Nevada v. Nye County, Case No. CV22-0503. We are asking the Fifth Judicial District court to prohibit the county from publicly announcing the selected candidates on each ballot prior to the close of polls on Election Day, from limiting the use of ADA touch screens to individuals with so-called “special needs,” from allowing election workers to ask about a voter’s disability or turn away otherwise eligible voters based on arbitrary decision making, and from using “stringent signature verifications” that violate state law.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada filed a lawsuit against Fremont Street Experience, LLC, and the city of Las Vegas in order to protect First Amendment rights on this important public forum. Fremont Street remains a public street. The case is Gordon v. City of Las Vegas, Case No. 2:22-cv-01446-RFB-EJY.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada filed a lawsuit to protect the public’s right to access family court proceedings. Nearly half of the district courts in Clark County are family courts, but a recent rule in the Eighth Judicial District Court allows for closing court proceedings to the public without cause.

Despite the passage of the Nevada Medical Marijuana Act and the Initiative to Regulate and Tax Marijuana, the State, specifically the Nevada State Board of Pharmacy, has failed to take action to comport with the will of Nevada voters, the Nevada Constitution, and Nevada Revised Statutes.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada Foundation seeks to restore the ability of North Las Vegas residents to elect a municipal court judge of their choosing. On Feb. 17, the city of North Las Vegas adopted Ordinance No. 3060, creating a new municipal court department and appointing a judge, Christopher Lee, to a 6-year term without any election. The ordinance directly violates the North Las Vegas City Charter, approved by the Nevada Legislature, which mandates that when the city appoints a judge to fill a vacant position in the Municipal Court, “[n]o such appointment extends beyond the first day of the month following the next general municipal election, at which election the office must be filled for the remaining unexpired term.” The next elections to be held in the City of North Las Vegas are scheduled for June and November of 2022, 4 years and two full election cycles before the appointment described in Ordinance No. 3060 ends. In its writ, the ACLU of Nevada is asking the court to require the city to hold an election for Municipal Court Department 1 during the 2022 election cycle as required by the North Las Vegas City Charter.

On May 11, 2021, the ACLU of Nevada and the Policing and Protest Clinic at the UNLV Boyd School of Law filed an amicus brief in Cates v. Stroud, a case on petition for review before the United States Supreme Court. The case calls into question the qualified immunity doctrine and arises from an incident in which a Las Vegas woman was subjected to a humiliating strip search during a visit to Nevada’s High Desert State Prison in violation of her constitutional rights. The brief urges the Supreme Court to grant the petition and review the case. For Nevada, qualified immunity creates a serious problem: If there are no state-level mechanisms for addressing civil rights abuses, and the federal courts won’t do it, how does our community protect their constitutional rights?