Revises provisions relating to crimes against public decency and good morals. (BDR 15-94)
Summary
SB111 creates a new criminal prohibition in Nevada law against selling, offering for sale, or purchasing “child remains,” defined as the body of a deceased person under 18 or body parts removed from a living child, at any stage of decomposition. The bill places this new offense in Chapter 201 of NRS, which covers crimes against public decency and good morals, and makes a violation a misdemeanor.
The bill includes a narrow exception for hospitals, accredited medical schools, dental schools, and institutions of higher education when the transaction is connected to education, research, or a similar purpose. It is set to take effect on July 1, 2025.
Impact
SB111 would amend Nevada’s criminal code by adding a new offense and penalty to Chapter 201 of NRS. It would make it unlawful for most persons to buy, sell, or offer to buy or sell child remains, while preserving limited institutional exceptions for educational and research uses. The bill would primarily affect individuals or entities involved in the handling, transfer, or acquisition of human remains, as well as hospitals and academic institutions that may lawfully possess such materials for legitimate purposes. The fiscal note indicates no state fiscal impact, but a potential increase in local jail or detention costs due to misdemeanor enforcement.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee testimony or votes, the available record suggests the measure is straightforward and likely intended as a public-decency and child-protection measure rather than a controversial policy overhaul. The bill’s framing and narrow exceptions indicate a targeted approach, with no documented opposition or support in the provided materials. Because there are no transcripts or vote records, no clear legislative split can be identified from the available context.
Contention
The main policy issue is the scope of the prohibition and how broadly it applies to the sale or purchase of child remains. Potential points of contention could include whether the exception for hospitals and educational institutions is sufficiently narrow, and how the law would interact with legitimate medical, research, or educational uses of human remains. Another possible concern is enforcement and whether the misdemeanor penalty is adequate or too broad, but no specific objections or competing viewpoints are documented in the provided materials.