Nevada Assembly Bill AB117

Nevada 2023 Regular Session

• Refer: 2/3/23
• Introduced: 2/6/23
• Report Pass: 4/24/23
• Refer: 4/25/23
• Failed: 6/6/23

Caption

Makes various changes relating to domestic terrorism. (BDR 43-568)

Impact

The introduction of AB117 marks a significant change in how domestic terrorism is categorized and tackled at the state level. It expands the definition of terrorism to include not only traditional acts of violence but also specific forms of organized opposition to government authority. This categorization may lead to increased surveillance and law enforcement activity surrounding specific groups perceived to be engaging in activities defined under this bill, thus impacting civil liberties and community relations.

Summary

Assembly Bill 117, introduced by Assemblywoman Jauregui, aims to address issues related to domestic terrorism by redefining certain criminal activities and establishing a framework for counter-terrorism funding. The bill defines 'domestic terror activity' to include a range of offenses such as armed association, criminal anarchy, and activities motivated by the perceived characteristics of individuals or groups. Additionally, it creates the Anti-Domestic Terrorism Assistance Account, which is to be funded with an appropriation of $5 million from the State General Fund to support local and state initiatives that combat domestic terror activities.

Sentiment

The reaction to AB117 has been mixed, reflecting broader national conversations around domestic terrorism and civil rights. Supporters argue that the bill is necessary to enhance public safety and provide law enforcement with the resources they need to address growing concerns surrounding domestic extremism. Critics, however, raise concerns about potential overreach and the implications of broad definitions that could lead to unjust targeting of specific communities or political groups.

Contention

Key points of contention surrounding AB117 include the balance between enhancing public safety and protecting civil liberties. Detractors emphasize that the broad definitions and provisions allowing for increased law enforcement power could lead to abuse and disproportionate impacts on marginalized communities. The legislation also invites discussion on the financial allocation for counter-terrorism initiatives, questioning whether the funds will be effectively utilized without creating undue harm or escalation in policing.