Nevada Assembly Bill AB89

Nevada 2025 Regular Session

• Refer: 1/6/25
• Introduced: 2/4/25
• Report Pass: 4/10/25
• Engrossed: 4/28/25
• Refer: 4/28/25
• Report Pass: 5/15/25
• Enrolled: 5/23/25
• Chaptered: 5/27/25
• Passed: 5/27/25

Caption

Imposes certain requirements relating to unclothed searches of children at certain juvenile justice facilities. (BDR 5-496)

Summary

Assembly Bill 89 requires juvenile justice facilities in Nevada to adopt and implement written policies governing unclothed searches of children who are detained in or committed to those facilities. The bill applies to regional facilities for the treatment and rehabilitation of children, local detention facilities, and state facilities for the detention of children. It generally prohibits unclothed searches unless an employee reasonably suspects the child has immediate access to a weapon or contraband and less intrusive search methods have already been exhausted. When an unclothed search is permitted, the bill requires at least two facility employees to be physically present for the entire search and, to the greatest extent practicable, for those employees to be the same gender as the child. It also requires the employee primarily responsible for the search to submit a written report to the facility administrator or superintendent within 72 hours, including a description of the search and any other requested information. The bill defines “unclothed search” as a search requiring removal or rearrangement of clothing to visually inspect breasts, buttocks, or genitalia.

Impact

AB 89 amends Nevada law in Chapters 62B and 63 of NRS by adding new policy requirements for juvenile detention and rehabilitation facilities. It does not ban unclothed searches outright, but it significantly narrows when they may occur and adds procedural safeguards, documentation requirements, and oversight obligations for facility administrators and superintendents. The bill affects operators and staff at juvenile facilities, and it is intended to strengthen protections for detained children while preserving limited search authority for safety and contraband concerns.

Sentiment

The bill appears to have received generally favorable legislative support, as reflected by its passage in both chambers. It passed the Assembly 27-15 and the Senate 19-1, suggesting broad bipartisan acceptance in the Senate and a more divided vote in the Assembly. The absence of recorded committee transcript discussion limits insight into detailed debate, but the vote pattern indicates overall support for increased safeguards in juvenile facilities.

Contention

The main point of contention is likely the balance between child privacy and safety in juvenile facilities. Supporters would favor the bill’s restrictions on intrusive searches, the requirement to exhaust less invasive methods first, and the added presence and reporting safeguards. Opponents or skeptics may be concerned that the bill could limit staff discretion in responding to weapons or contraband and add administrative burdens. The split Assembly vote suggests some disagreement over how far the state should go in regulating search practices, while the near-unanimous Senate vote suggests less resistance in the upper chamber.