Nevada governor’s signature crime bill dies in the Legislature

CARSON CITY — Last-minute changes to Gov. Joe Lombardo’s signature crime bill — including new penalties for “smash-and-grabs” — led to the death of the measure when the Nevada Legislature failed to pass it before the session ended Monday night.

Both chambers approved the heavily amended Senate Bill 457, the Republican governor and former Clark County sheriff’s multi-faceted crime and public safety bill. The Assembly voted 36-6 late Monday night, with six Democrats in opposition. But the Senate needed to agree to on amendments made in the Assembly and they did not do so before the session was constitutionally required to close.

The Senate voted 20-1, with Las Vegas Democrat Sen. James Ohrenschall as the sole dissenting vote, earlier in the day.

Sen. Melanie Scheible, chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, told lawmakers in the Assembly Judiciary Committee later that afternoon that she had been working with the Republican governor’s office on the changes that focus the bill on DUI penalties, “smash-and-grabs” and school safety.

A person who intentionally causes property damage to a retail establishment during a theft offense could be guilty of a category C felony.

“It was an effort to find a middle ground between addressing retail theft and not reducing our felony theft thresholds,” Scheible, D-Las Vegas, told assemblymembers.

Resort corridor court section up for debate

Athar Haseebullah, executive director of the ACLU of Nevada, decried the amendment and the lack of transparency around its development and adoption. He said the ACLU and other civil rights groups had not been involved in the amendments and negotiations appeared to only take off in recent days.

The amendment became available online less than half an hour before the Senate convened Monday afternoon to consider the bill.

“We’re talking about the most sensitive issues that are going to end up leading people to prisons, and we’re told to just trust the government and take them at their word once again,” Haseebullah said in a Monday afternoon interview.

He was particularly concerned with an addition that was not discussed in the bill’s first hearing on May 28, nor brought to his group and peers. It would require large counties to designate corridors where crime “poses significant risk to public safety and the economic welfare to the state” where a justice court may operate. In other words, it would allow for a court dedicated to crimes on the Strip or other tourist areas. The court could prohibit a defendant from entering the corridor for up to two years as a condition of release or sentencing, according to the amended bill.

The section would have essentially called for the return of the Resort Corridor Court, which ended in November 2024.

Matt Griffin, a lobbyist for the Nevada Resort Association, said the intent of the new section was to address repeat offenders on the Strip who frequently trespass by going into the property.

“If I were to assault someone working at a Macy’s, a condition is very likely to be that I can’t go on that basis,” Griffin said during the Assembly hearing Monday afternoon.

“We’re already viewed as one of the biggest company towns in America, but for them to attempt to include an amendment at the last second to require the county commission to create such a court is such a cop out,” Haseebullah said. “The effect of that means that county commissioners would be able to say, afterwards, we had no choice but to create this provision. If the model was a success, then the Justice Court would not have voted to get rid of it ended the court more than a year ago.”

Retail theft thresholds, habitual offender changes out

SB 457 was politically challenging when first detailed, in part because of a fiscal note from the Nevada Department of Corrections that projects the bill, as introduced, could cost $42.2 million in future state budgets because of an increased prison population.

SB 457 had recommended lowering the felony threshold limit for theft from $1,200 to $750, but it was removed from the bill in an amendment. Backers said it was intended to deter an increase in shoplifting crimes throughout the state. The amendments also removed sections lowering the number of crimes that would define someone as a habitual offender.

The amendment also removed provisions that detailed increased penalties for fentanyl trafficking.

Contact McKenna Ross at mross@reviewjournal.com. Follow @mckenna_ross_ on X.