Civil Rights Advocates React to Senate Passage of Lombardo Crime Bill

LAS VEGAS – Civil rights advocates are calling two minor amendments to the Lombardo Crime Bill positive additions to a bill that “still belongs in a trash can.”

The Nevada Senate voted after midnight Wednesday to approve AB4, Gov. Lombardo’s crime bill, creating regressive, data-averse policies and allowing for the reestablishment of the “Casino Company Court” that previously targeted people experiencing homelessness for criminal prosecution and allowed for the banishment of those before the court, even from public streets. The Senate added two small provisions related to immigration.

The ACLU of Nevada also took issue with newly introduced Senate Bill 9, which would allow for the establishment of the “Casino Company Court” if the Governor chooses to veto his own crime bill because of the two added provisions that the Trump Administration might take issue with. The ACLU of Nevada did commend the Nevada Senate for allowing for telephonic testimony to occur after the Nevada Assembly refused to do so.

ACLU of Nevada executive director Athar Haseebullah (he/him) said:

“This Special Session is on track to be remembered as one of the strangest political moments in memory and an unprofessional disaster. In the middle of the night, the Senate passed Governor Lombardo’s proposed crime bill. While we were glad to see the Senate at least attempt to include a couple provisions that could help immigrant communities, which did not occur in the Assembly despite strong attempts by the Latino Legislative Caucus and others to do so, the crime bill remains a disaster and harmful to all communities, including immigrant communities. For a variety of reasons, this bill still belongs in a trash can.

“This bill, if signed into law, will lead to even more corporate influence within our judicial system, allowing for billion-dollar casino companies to once again have their own judicial system targeting homeless people on public streets for criminal prosecution and creating a gateway for further privatization of our judicial system. The casino companies have shown can force bad policies through the Legislature with relative ease, regardless of party, which is sad but not surprising. The introduction of SB9 to re-establish the casino company court in the event the Governor vetoes his own crime bill demonstrates just how powerful casino companies are within an unaccountable political system that is not subject to transparency laws and where backdoor deals are commonplace.

“To be clear, attempts to force the reinstatement of the failed casino company court will be met with legal challenges if passed, because unlike our legislators that voted in support of the bill, we will actually fight back. We are grateful to the 11 assemblymembers who voted No on the bill and two senators, Dina Neal and James Ohrsenschall, for standing up for equal justice. In the months ahead, I'm hoping legislative Democrats take some time to find an identity so they can’t be bullied by Governor Lombardo, Donald Trump, and casino companies, and I’m hoping legislative Republicans do the same, so they can stop widely expanding the government in the new and problematic ways they’ve been doing.”

Clark County assistant public defender John Piro (he/him) said:

“At midnight, when many Nevadans were asleep, the Senate passed the Governor’s Crime Bill, AB4. It is being sold as a ‘public safety’ bill, but the reality is far different, and our communities should be concerned. The minor additions added in the dead of night offer only symbolic protections, while creating new forms of criminalization that will fall hardest on those with the least political power.

“This bill encourages a system where Nevada residents are treated as outsiders in their own neighborhoods and where minor mistakes become grounds for banishment while also exposing immigrants to potentially more contact with law enforcement and ICE. It does almost nothing to enhance actual safety, while simultaneously expanding surveillance practices that disproportionately affect immigrant families, many of whom already avoid interacting with public systems, including schools, law enforcement, and the courts, out of fear. Simply put, this bill does nothing to meaningfully protect immigrants. True public safety comes from resources, stability, and trust, not from exclusion zones and surveillance. Nevadans deserve policies that unite communities, not ones that pit them against each other.”

Washoe County public defender Evelyn Grosenick (she/her) said:

"Good legislation is built on collaboration, transparency, and input from all sides. Unfortunately, this legislation has been one-sided from the start, and our proposed amendments have not been given meaningful consideration. Public defenders have repeatedly offered assistance, expertise, and alternative language to ensure that the constitutional rights of all Nevadans are protected. We have also provided language intended to preserve the positive momentum achieved through the 2019 criminal justice reforms, reforms that helped drive crime downward. We should be building on that success, not undoing it.

"As written, AB4 does not reflect the balanced, informed approach Nevadans expect and deserve. We need a bill that incorporates input from all stakeholders to safeguard our rights and to ensure continued progress in reducing crime. We urge Nevadans to contact their legislators and encourage them to vote No on AB4. Let’s move forward with legislation that reflects broad input, protects our constitutional rights, and builds on Nevada’s proven progress."

Nevada state director for the Fines and Fees Justice Center Nick Shepack (he/him) said:

“The Fines and Fees Justice Center is deeply troubled by the passing of AB4 in the Senate. Despite public outcry from the community, experts, and advocates, no attempts to meaningfully amend the bill occurred. The continued use of fines, fees and incarcerations by the legislature as a means of addressing issues that stem from poverty and a lack of resources is shameful. SB4 widens the reach of the criminal justice system without any data to support the many changes to criminal law. The order-out provisions and strip corridor court did not work, plain and simple, when last in operation it stripped financial resources from those fortunate to be in a position to pay the fines and fees and operated as a revolving door of incarceration for the unhoused. We will continue to fight for a justice system that addresses the root causes of crime instead of leaning on failed carceral and financial penalty schemes.”