LAS VEGAS — Over the weekend, Nevada Governor Joe Lombardo enacted an extensive crime reform initiative aimed at revitalizing a unique court system that prohibited certain offenders from entering the Las Vegas Strip. This legislation also aims to impose harsher penalties for offenses such as smash-and-grab thefts, DUIs, and assaults on hospitality workers.

Dubbed the Safe Streets and Neighborhoods Act, the law facilitates the re-establishment of the controversial Resort Corridor Court. This court targets petty crimes like theft, assault, drug-related offenses, and loitering on the Las Vegas Strip, enforcing a one-year ban from the area for violators.

The enactment of this legislation signifies a significant political triumph for the Republican governor as he gears up for a challenging reelection bid in 2026. His race is expected to be highly competitive, with recent polls showing him in a tight contest with potential Democratic challenger, Attorney General Aaron Ford.

Challenges Ahead for the Return of Resort Corridor Court

Lobbyists from the resort industry and the hospitality workers’ union, both influential groups, have collaborated to advocate for the reopening of the Resort Corridor Court. They argue that its return would enhance safety and safeguard the reputation of Nevada’s prime tourist destination, especially during a period of declining visitor numbers.

Between June 2024 and June 2025, the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority reported an 11% decline in visitors.

Opponents question its legality and say the orders unfairly target homeless people.

“We greatly appreciate Governor Lombardo and legislative leadership for working together to advance this important tourism-safety legislation,” said Virginia Valentine, the president and CEO of the Nevada Resort Association, in a Tuesday statement, adding that the court will ensure Las Vegas remains a premier tourism destination.

The law authorizes the Clark County Commission to revive the court, but it is unclear when – or if – the commission will take up the issue.

Jennifer Cooper, a spokesperson for the county, said it is premature for the commission to engage at this point because the discretion to revive the court lies with the Justice Court. The court did not return requests for comment.

Nevada judges instituted the court two years ago, but they voted to disband it a year and a half later.

If the court program is revived, litigation challenging its legality is expected, according to Athar Haseebullah, executive director of the ACLU of Nevada, which has been a staunch opponent of the court.

“There will continue to be pushback by our organization and by so many others who don’t want to see this continued creep of privatization of our judicial system,” he said in a phone interview.

Bill also bars immigration enforcement inside schools

The bill also included amendments prohibiting immigration enforcement officers from entering school grounds without a warrant and requiring detention facilities to maintain a running list of the people they hold.

Nevada joins states like California and Maryland in enacting laws restricting federal immigration enforcement officers from accessing school property without a warrant.

Democratic lawmakers in Nevada put forward a proposal in the last regular session to bar immigration officials from school grounds without a warrant, but Lombardo vetoed it, calling it “well-intentioned but fundamentally overbroad.” Lombardo’s office said the amendment Democrats added to his bill abides by the constitution and includes exceptions that allow law enforcement officers to keep schools safe.

Those exceptions include school resource officers and law enforcement who need to enter the property in case of an emergency, such as a school shooting.

It is the latest state effort to make immigration enforcement restrictions clear following a Trump administration announcement at the beginning of the year that it would allow federal immigration agencies to make arrests at schools, churches and hospitals, ending a policy that had been in effect since 2011.

Cecelia González, a Democratic assemblymember who sponsored the original immigration bill, ultimately voted against the governor’s crime package. She said she is happy that “students are finally being taken seriously about their real, lived fear” but overall thinks the bill will do more harm than good.