Nevada’s Crime Bill Becomes Unexpected Vehicle for Landmark Immigration Reforms
Nevada has enacted some of its most significant immigration reforms to date, surprisingly embedded within a crime bill signed into law by Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo. The move marks a notable shift, given the governor’s previous opposition to expanded protections for immigrant communities.
For years, Nevada progressives have advocated for bolstering protections for the state’s immigrant population, focusing on limiting collaboration between local police and federal authorities and strengthening data privacy measures. Now, following revisions spearheaded by Democrats, the new law will restrict the ability of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to operate on school grounds and mandate the Nevada Department of Corrections (NDOC) to establish a public locator for all incarcerated individuals, including those awaiting ICE pickup. A further amendment to a school zone safety bill will limit the sharing of student personal information.
The reworked crime bill passed the Nevada Assembly with a vote of 31-11 and the Senate 16-2, with opposition solely from Democratic lawmakers in both chambers.
According to policymakers who spoke with The Nevada Independent, the passage of these immigration protections was a carefully orchestrated effort, aided by the urgency surrounding Lombardo’s crime bill, which had previously stalled in the final hours of the 2025 regular session. There was concern that the added amendments could have derailed the bill – a key priority for Lombardo since assuming office. As a former sheriff of the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, the governor has consistently campaigned on a platform of restoring “law and order” to the state.
This moment represents a unique opportunity for immigration protections in Nevada, a politically diverse state with one of the highest proportions of undocumented residents in the nation and a growing number of ICE arrests. In September, Lombardo formalized an agreement with the Trump administration to align with the president’s immigration agenda, outlining several measures to increase enforcement against unauthorized immigration since 2023.
As part of that agreement, Lombardo committed to “counter-balance” any actions taken by the state attorney general and Legislature to enact what he termed “unlawful sanctuary policies.”
However, both conservative and progressive voices refuted the notion that the new crime law would invite the federal government to reapply a “sanctuary” designation, arguing that the protections do not exclusively benefit immigrants. In a statement posted on X, Lombardo’s office asserted that the new law will “allow for law enforcement to do what they must to keep our schools safe” and that the privacy safeguards are consistent with federal law.
“AB4 is not an unlawful sanctuary policy. In reality, it strengthens laws against theft, domestic violence, and driving under the influence — crimes fueled by the addiction epidemic inflicted on our country by cartel activity,” Lombardo wrote on X shortly before signing the bill.
Crafting the Compromise
Beyond the new protections, the law will reinstate a court dedicated to handling crimes committed on the Las Vegas Strip – a proposal strongly supported by the Nevada Resort Association – and increase penalties for certain types of burglary and driving under the influence (DUI) offenses.
Sen. John Steinbeck (R-Las Vegas) emphasized the importance of these provisions, stating in an interview with The Indy that he was willing to support the immigration protections in exchange for the inclusion of DUI reforms and the new corridor court. He described the previous failure to pass the crime bill during the 2025 session as a “biggest disappointments.”
“Everything we do in this bill, it’s going to affect somebody positively,” Steinbeck said. “Somebody won’t have their loved one killed by a drunk driver. Someone won’t get assaulted or harassed on the Strip. Somebody will be identified through the strengthening laws on assault.”
Steinbeck noted that extensive discussions took place between Republicans and Democrats during the rapid special session, resulting in several technical adjustments to the immigration protections. Having previously served on the state’s Homeland Security Commission, he expressed confidence that the revised language would not expose Nevada to being labeled a sanctuary jurisdiction – a designation often used by the Trump administration to scrutinize states and cities with immigration protections.
“As far as the amendments that went through, they don’t worry me at all,” Steinbeck said. “That’s why I went ahead and voted for it.”
He clarified that the law does not restrict police access to school properties, particularly in emergency situations.
Many of the new immigration protections mirror existing federal law. The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act already limits the release of student records, and, prior to a policy reversal by President Donald Trump earlier this year, immigration enforcement activities were prohibited in sensitive locations like schools and churches. In 2017, school districts in Clark and Washoe counties adopted resolutions to protect students from immigration enforcement.
The current language regarding school protections differs significantly from earlier proposals. During the 2025 session, Assm. Cecelia Gonzalez (D-Las Vegas) introduced a bill that would have explicitly banned ICE enforcement on school campuses without a warrant or court order. Lombardo vetoed that measure, arguing it would effectively transform schools into “sanctuary zones.” The current language stipulates that school districts cannot grant law enforcement access to school grounds without a lawful order or in cases of exigent circumstances, such as a criminal investigation. The bill clarifies that the definition of “law enforcement officer” excludes sheriffs, their deputies, and correctional officers.
In November, Lombardo stated on X that the crime bill “now conforms with constitutional practices” and does not violate the state’s immigration agreement with the Trump administration.
Looking Ahead
Progressive lawmakers and advocates acknowledge a growing momentum for immigration protections, fueled by the increasing visibility of immigration enforcement’s impact. Assm. Selena Torres-Fossett (D-Las Vegas), a long-time advocate for expanding these protections, shared that her experiences as a teacher have shown her how ICE creates stress for families, even leading some to consider self-deportation. She has previously introduced legislation to prevent police partnerships with ICE, but those efforts were unsuccessful.
Groups like the Latino Legislative Caucus and Make the Road Nevada credited the leadership of Sen. Nicole Cannizzaro (D-Las Vegas) and incoming Assembly Democratic Caucus chair, Elaine Marzola (D-Henderson), for securing these measures.
Despite these gains, progressives emphasize that further protections are needed, particularly anticipating intensified immigration enforcement under a potential future Trump administration.
“At the end of the day, when I knock on doors, one of the complaints that I get from my constituents is that Democrats aren’t doing enough to support immigrant communities,” Torres-Fossett said. “I know that there’s still more work to be done.”
