Authorizes a law enforcement agency to require applicants for certain positions of employment to make certain attestations as a condition precedent to employment. (BDR 23-1061)
Summary
AB 400 amends Nevada law governing hiring standards for law enforcement agencies. Under current law, agencies may not require a peace officer applicant to disclose cannabis use that occurred before the application as a condition of employment. This bill creates a new exception: a law enforcement agency may require an applicant for a position that authorizes or requires possession or carrying of a firearm to attest to any cannabis use in the 12 months immediately before the application date.
The bill also preserves existing authority for agencies to ask about cannabis use that occurs after an application is submitted and to require screening tests either at hiring or as a condition of continued employment. The bill defines “use of cannabis” broadly to include both adult-use and medical cannabis.
Impact
AB 400 would narrow the existing statutory restriction in NRS 289.030 by allowing law enforcement agencies to impose a pre-employment cannabis-use attestation requirement on applicants for firearm-related positions, including peace officer roles. It does not mandate such a requirement, but it authorizes agencies to adopt it as part of hiring. The bill leaves intact other employer tools, including post-application cannabis inquiries and drug screening policies, and it applies only to the specified employment context.
Sentiment
The available record shows no committee transcript, votes, or recorded opposition, so there is no documented debate to indicate a strong public or legislative split. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears to be framed as a targeted hiring-policy adjustment for law enforcement rather than a broad change to cannabis law. The absence of fiscal impact and the narrow scope suggest a technical, policy-specific proposal.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely the balance between law enforcement hiring standards and privacy or fairness concerns for applicants, especially those who used cannabis legally under adult-use or medical-use rules. Supporters would likely view the bill as giving agencies more discretion to screen firearm-carrying applicants for recent cannabis use, while critics may see it as an added barrier to employment or an inconsistent treatment of lawful cannabis use. Because no hearing transcript is provided, no specific legislator, agency, or stakeholder position is documented in the record supplied here.
In law enforcement background investigations and employment information, providing for additional employment history for certain Federal immigration enforcement applicants.
To Repeal The Statutes Concerning The Occupational Authorization And Licensure Of Certain Employment Offices And Agencies; And To Repeal The Arkansas Private Employment Agency Act Of 1975.