►
From YouTube: 5/30/2021 - Assembly Committee on Judiciary
Description
For agenda and additional meeting information: https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/Calendar/A/
Videos of archived meetings are made available as a courtesy of the Nevada Legislature.
The videos are part of an ongoing effort to keep the public informed of and involved in the legislative process.
All videos are intended for personal use and are not intended for use in commercial ventures or political campaigns.
Closed Captioning is Auto-Generated and is not an official representation of what is being spoken.
A
A
Here
please
mark
assemblyman,
o'neill
absent
excuse.
He
is
presenting
a
bill
in
senate
legislative
operations
committee.
I
think
he'll
be
up
here
as
soon
as
he
can
good
evening.
Welcome
to
the
night
version
of
assembly,
judiciary
committee
and
welcome
to
the
sunday
version.
I
don't
think
we've
had
either
of
those
so
far
this
session,
but
I
missed
you
all
so
much
since
yesterday's
meeting
that
here
we
are
again.
A
We,
as
I
noted
we
do,
have
a
quorum,
and
I
want
to
say
good
after
good
evening
to
those
joining
us
here
to
those
who
might
be
watching
on
the
internet.
Just
a
couple
quick
housekeeping
matters.
If
you
could
please
silence
your
devices
and
then,
if
we
could
just
be
nice
to
each
other,
that's
probably
adequate
for
today,
so
committee
you'll
see
that
we
have
one
bill
on
our
agenda
for
this
evening.
We
just
received
this
bill
on
the
floor
a
couple
of
hours
ago.
A
A
C
Thank
you,
chair
yeager,
I'm
melanie
schaible
senator
for
district
nine
in
the
southwest
part
of
las
vegas.
Thank
you
so
much
for
having
me
here
tonight
and
you
know.
I
do
appreciate
the
whole
committee
reconvening
for
another
meeting
and
I'd
like
to
think
it's
just
for
me,
but
I
know
that
actually,
I
would
not
have
asked
you
guys
to
come
back
into
this
room
and
hear
another
bill,
especially
from
me.
If
I
didn't
think
that
it
was
worthwhile
policy
and
actually
important
for
moving
our
state
forward.
What
sb
164
does
is.
C
It
makes
some
improvements
to
the
statute
covering
prostitution
so
that
we
can
do
a
better
job
of
combating
sex
trafficking
and
human
trafficking.
Here
in
the
state
of
nevada,
it's
a
topic
that
we've
covered
a
lot
this
session.
We've
covered
it
a
lot
in
every
session
because
it
continues
to
persist
in
nevada,
despite
the
many
many
very
caring
and
devoted
people
organizations
agencies
that
are
fighting
it
on
the
ground
one.
C
So
I
will
not
bore
you
with
the
long
journey
of
sb
164
and
how
it
came
to
be
in
its
current
reprint,
and
I
will
suffice
to
say
that
something
that
everybody
could
agree
on
was
that
we
were
not
able
to
collect
adequate
data
on
how
many
people
we
were,
how
many
people
were
being
arrested
in
the
state
of
nevada
for
engaging
in
prostitution
and
how
many
people
were
being
arrested
in
the
state
of
nevada
for
soliciting
prostitution,
where
the
distinction
is
that
someone
who
engages
in
prostitution
is
offering
sexual
services
for
money
or
a
thing
of
value
and
a
person
who
is
soliciting
prostitution
is
paying
money
or
offering
a
thing
of
value
for
sexual
services.
C
We
know
that
you
were
arrested
for
being
accused
of
selling
sex
and,
if
you
were
arrested
under
what
still
remains
as
201.354,
you
are
arrested
for
being
a
customer
of
prostitution,
and
that
should
help
us
to
get
a
better
handle
on
the
problem
that
we're
facing,
as
well
as
understanding
law,
enforcement's
response
to
it.
It
does
not
change
any
of
the
definitions
of
prostitution.
It
does
not
change
any
of
the
penalties,
it
does
not
change
which
acts
would
be
considered
criminal
and
which
acts
would
not
again.
C
It
simply
provides
us
with
a
different
statute
number,
which
will
mean
a
different
knock
code,
which
means
that
we
will
be
able
to
retrospectively
better
understand
what
law
enforcement
has
been
able
to
do.
It
makes
one
other
small
policy
change,
which
is
that
the
language
that
was
taken
from
subsection
3
of
nrs
201.354,
which
was
the
definition
of
prostitution
for
the
seller,
which
has
now
been
made
into
a
new
section,
is
also
updated
so
that
we
use
the
term
person
instead
of
the
term
prostitute.
C
Where
the
statute
used
to
read.
If
a
law
enforcement
officer
gives
a
citation
to
a
prostitute,
it
will
now
read
if
a
law
enforcement
officer
issues
a
citation
to
a
person
who
is
violating
this
subsection
of
the
law,
which
I
think
has
in
my
conversations
on
this
bill,
which,
as
I
noted,
started
out
as
something
very
different.
A
A
D
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
and
I'm
gonna.
I'm
gonna
try
and
do
the
former
speaker
kirkpatrick's
question.
This
is
a
really
good
bill
right.
D
Thank
you
so
much
yes,
this
is.
This
is
a
good
bill.
My
question
is
under
section
four,
where
you
have,
it
is
unlawful
for
a
customer,
and
I
didn't
see
under
section
3
where
it
was
defined,
because
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we
capture
the
person,
I'm
just
concerned
with
customer.
Just
you
know
if
somebody's
just
soliciting,
but
they
haven't
paid
money.
D
Yet
you
know
what
you
see,
what
I'm
saying
that,
if
somebody's
just
soliciting,
we
still
want
to
capture
them
even
there's
if
there's
no
exchange
of
money
yet
so
how
do
we
make
sure
we
capture
the
the
buyer
in
this
case
by
making
sure
that
it's
all
inclusive
under
that
term.
C
Thank
you
so
much
melanie
scheibel
for
the
record,
and
so
in
section
four.
I
think
if
you
look
down
to
subsections
two
and
three
actually
all
of
the
rest
of
the
subsections
utilize,
the
term
person
instead
of
customer
the
only
place
where
we've
replaced
person
with
customer
is
in
the
very
first
line-
and
I
did
have
a
conversation
with
legal
and
drafting
about
that.
And
it's
it's
mostly
a
stylistic
choice,
but
because
the
purpose
of
the
bill
is
to
separate
out
the
two
statutes.
C
We
wanted
to
make
it
clear
that
this
statute
would
become
the
quote
customer
statute.
And
so
the
purpose
is
not
to
develop
a
definition
of
a
customer
that
you
know
they
have
paid
money
or
have
not
paid
money,
but
simply
to
indicate
that
it's
not
a
person
who
is
offering
sex
for
a
thing
of
value.
But
somebody
who
is
seeking
it.
D
So
my
concern
is,
I
want
to
make
sure
we
do
capture
the
person.
So
my
concern
is
what
happens
if
this
is
challenged
later
and
somebody
says:
well,
money
wasn't
exchanged
so
they're,
no
longer
a
customer.
So
it's
not.
This
section
is
not
valid.
That's
my
concern
is
just
making
sure
that
we
clearly
capture
the
person.
C
So
melanie
scheibel
again
for
the
record,
as
I
read
this
bill
and
as
I'm
looking
at
section
four
subsection,
two
subsection
two
2
and
subsection.
C
3
are
the
ones
that
actually
define
the
acts
that
would
be
considered
unlawful
so
like
in
sub
section
three
sorry,
subsection
two
is
soliciting
a
child
or
an
officer
posing
as
a
child,
which
also,
I
should
note.
This
chapter
is
also
changed
by
an
assembly
bill
that
you
guys
heard
with
a
number
that
I
don't
remember:
senate
bill
or
a
b.
It
was
an
assembly,
but
it
was
64.
C
Maybe
doesn't
matter
not
not
the
point
here.
Those
two
subsections
said
sections
two
and
subsections:
three.
It
doesn't
say
a
customer
who
violates
these
provisions.
It
says
a
person
who
violates
these
provisions.
D
E
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
Yes,
the
scope
of
the
crime
that's
covered,
the
elements
of
the
crime
is
not
being
changed.
Customer
is
actually
the
term
that's
used
in
the
existing
law.
If
you
scroll
down
through
that
section,
you'll
see
subsection
six,
which
turns
into
subsection
five
says
a
customer
who
violates
this
section
and
there
are
other
references
in
nrs
to
a
customer,
so
we're
not
changing
how
the
statute
applies.
Now
in
this
bill,.
F
Thank
you
so
much
chair
and
thank
you
senator
for
bringing
this
bill.
You
kind
of
touched
on
it
in
the
beginning
how
this
bill
has
gone
through
a
lot
of
revisions,
and
I
am
a
co-sponsor
of
this
bill
and
I
was
very
excited
I
think,
for
the
original
bill,
and
so
I
was
just
curious
kind
of
like
what
happened
from
the
original
bill
to
you're
laughing.
F
So
I
imagine
the
answer
may
be
maybe
a
little
long,
but
I
just
want
to
make
sure
the
intent
of
the
bill
is
still
what
you
intend
the
bill
to
be,
because
I
think
it
is
very
different
from
from
the
first
bill
that
I
had
originally
read.
Thank
you.
C
Originally
sb164
would
have
provided
immunity
and
safe
harbor
to
people
who
were
engaged
in
sex
work
for
in
a
variety
of
different
situations,
and
the
intent
of
the
bill
was
to
ensure
that
if
somebody
was
being
sex,
trafficked
or
being
trafficked
and
they
were
caught
up
or
swept
swept
up
in,
you
know
an
undercover
type
operation
that
they
that
at
the
very
outset
they
were
never
arrested
and
never
entered
the
criminal
justice
system.
That
turned
that
is,
of
course,
a
very,
very
long
and
involved
process.
C
And
so
it
wasn't
as
simple
as
just
one
bill
to
say.
Law
enforcement-
and
I
think
my
colleagues
behind
me
will
talk
about
this.
You
know
we
have
to
it's
not
as
easy
as
telling
law
enforcement
officers,
don't
arrest
victims
because
they
don't
wear.
C
But
it
turns
out
that
we
are
restructuring
our
interim
committees
this
year
and
we're
not
doing
interim
studies
this
year
so
that
that
iteration
of
the
bill
also
became
less
tenable,
and
so
that
was
when
you
know
I.
I
asked
myself
okay,
I
still
have
this
vehicle,
I'm
not
interested
in
pushing
it
just
to
push
it,
but
is
there
anything
when
we
go
into
the
interim
to
have
this
conversation
that
I'll
say
to
myself
gosh?
C
I
wish
we
had
just
done
this
one
thing
before
we
left
session
so
that
we
could
start
doing
a
better
job
having
those
conversations
and
it
was
talking
to
law
enforcement
talking
to
survivors
of
sex
trafficking.
Talking
to
people
who
have
been
through
the
justice
system
who
said
yeah,
we
need
the
information
on
who's
being
arrested
when
and
where,
and
if
we
can't
figure
that
out.
Just
based
on
you
know
that
code
right
now,
the
201.354
or
sorry.
I
think
I
said
it
wrong.
C
You
know
what
I'm
talking
about
two
at
one
point:
yeah
three,
five:
four:
what
if
we
just
divided
it
into
two
separate
statutes,
and
so
I
asked
my
partners
in
law
enforcement
about,
I
said
sure,
no
problem,
and
so
it
seemed
like
a
pretty
easy.
C
Relatively
you
know,
easy
way
to
at
least
lay
the
groundwork
to
get
better
data,
to
have
the
conversation
to
move
towards
protecting
victims,
better
and
and
ensuring
that
we
are
that
we
are
arresting
people
who
are
actually
committing
crimes
and
not
arresting
people
who
are
not.
F
Thank
you
so
much
for
that
explanation.
I
think
a
few
of
us
were
wondering,
so
I
really
appreciate
that
and
appreciate
the
work
on
this
bill
and
hope
to
work
with
you
on
that
in
the
interim.
Thank
you.
G
Thank
you
chair
and
thank
you
for
the
presentation.
I
have
a
question
about
data
and
information.
That
would
be
helpful,
so
the
thing
for
instance
that
I
can
think
of
is
you
know
wanting
to
know
how
many
of
the
of
the
buyers,
let's
say
are
are
from
out
of
town
versus
how
many
are
residents
that
type
of
stuff
is
this?
C
Melanie
scheibel
senate
district
9
for
the
record-
and
this
is
not
a
data
collection
bill.
This
does
not
require
law
enforcement
agencies
to
collect
any
data,
and
so
the
answer
to
your
question
would
depend
on
the
law
enforcement
agency
and
it
would
depend
on
the
person
gathering
the
data.
I
imagine
that
some
law
enforcement
agencies
have
for
lack
of
a
better
term,
a
database
that
includes
the
the
name,
the
offense
and
the
the
res
like
where
the
person
lives.
Other
law
enforcement
agencies,
maybe
do
not.
C
Some
might
have
age
and
sex
in
there
as
well.
But
the
the
point
is
that,
if
the,
if
the
very
first
piece
of
data,
what
the
offense
is
can't
be
determined
without
going
into
the
arrest
record,
then
you
are
talking
about
having
an
academic
comb
through
thousands
and
thousands
of
arrest
records
to
figure
out
if
this
person
was
arrested
because
they
were
accused
of
selling
or
buying,
and
I
hope
that
helps
to
answer
the
question.
A
H
Hopefully
the
I
talked
to
the
center.
Thank
you
chair.
I
should
say
I
spoke
with
senator
just
beforehand
and
I'll
just
conf
for
I'll
make
this
a
question.
I
confirmed
that
our
conversation
was
appropriate.
You,
the
change,
was
made.
H
C
Thank
you,
melanie
scheibel
for
the
record
and
I'm
happy
to
clarify
this
a
little
bit
further.
So
currently
in
law.
The
term
prostitute
is
a
chapter-wide
definition,
and
so
this
bill
does
not
remove
the
chapter-wide
definition
because
it
is
utilized
in
a
number
of
different
statutes,
like
our
sex
trafficking
statute
and
our
involuntary
servitude
statute,
and
so
we're
starting
small
here
and
we're
just
removing
that
definition
and
that
terminology
from
the
section
not
the
chapter
because
we're
not
removing
it
from
the
whole
chapter.
C
Legal
and
I
had
you,
know
the
legal
draft
and
I
had
a
conversation
about
whether
or
not
it
made
sense
to
leave
the
term
prostitute
in
the
very
first
line,
and
this
also
goes
back
to
something
on
kasama's
question
about
leaving
the
word
customer
in
the
very
first
line
of
subsection
two
and
determined
that,
because
the
chapter-wide
definitions,
weren't
changing,
we
were
going
to
leave
them
in
the
first
two
sections
to
make
sure
that
when
you
read
the
chapter
as
a
whole,
it's
clear
that
you're
talking
about
the
same
the
the
same
crimes.
C
H
H
A
A
B
Thank
you,
chair,
yeager
and
senator
scheibel.
Thank
you
for
bringing
this.
So
just
so
I'm
clear.
The
whole
purpose
at
this
point
is
just
to
divide
this
chapter
and
have
two
separate
charges,
one
for
the
customer,
one
for
the
seller,
no
data
collection
yet,
but
we're
hopeful.
Okay,
that's
all
I
need
to
know.
Thank
you.
A
Just
so
you
know
it's
not
going
well
for
our
guys
either
at
the
moment.
Yeah.
Sorry!
So,
okay,
I
don't
see
further
questions
chair
schaible,
thank
you
for
presenting
we'll
ask
you
to
sit
tight
for
a
moment,
we'll
take
some
testimony
on
the
bill
and
then
we'll
have
a
chance
for
wrap
up
testimony.
So
at
this
time,
I'll
open
up
for
testimony
in
support
of
senate
bill
164.
I
I
Cheri
yeager
vice
chairwin
members
of
committee,
corey
salfrieno,
representing
the
washoe
county
sheriff's
office
here
in
support
of
the
bill.
We
want
to
thank
senator
scheibel
for
being
a
champion
of
this
effort
and
working
with
us
diligently
throughout
the
process
and
to
put
some
of
the
committee
members
minds
at
ease.
Our
knives
data
and
our
teams
that
are
currently
working
in
the
human
exploitation
and
trafficking
realm
are
really
taking
the
statistical
data.
So
you
guys
will
have
that
data,
and
this
will
just
help
in
that
effort.
Thank
you
very
much
chair.
I
A
J
Good
evening
to
your
jager
members
of
the
committee,
this
is
kendra
burchie
with
the
washoe
county
public
defender's
office.
I'd
like
to
hope,
you
know
that
at
this
point
I
just
want
to
again
echo
my
support
and
I
really
look
forward
to
continuing
the
hard
work
that
senator
schreibel
has
started
on
this
issue,
and
hopefully
we
can
come
back
next
session
with
some
additional
bills.
Regarding
this
very
important
topic.
Thank
you.
K
John
pierre,
for
the
record
for
the
clark
county
public
defender's
office.
Thank
you
chairman.
Thank
you
for
holding
this
hearing.
We
think
this
is
a
very
important
measure.
I
think
you've
heard
throughout
the
session
that
nevada
is
one
of
the
worst
states
when
it
comes
to
human
trafficking,
which
is
a
serious
problem.
So
there
are
some
studies
that
need
to
be
done,
and
we
thank
senator
schaible
for
bringing
this
issue
up.
K
A
L
Good
evening,
thank
you,
chair
for
callers
wishing
to
testify
in
support
of
senate
bill
164,
please
press
star
9
now
to
take
your
place
in
the
queue
and
we
will
begin
with
caller
with
the
last
three
digits
of
918
caller.
Please
slowly
state
and
spell
your
name
for
the
record.
You
have
two
minutes
and
may
begin.
M
A
A
Thank
you,
bps
I'll,
close
testimony
in
support
again.
Everyone
in
the
room
has
already
testified
in
support,
so
we'll
go
to
opposition
and
again
that
there's
no
opposition
in
the
room.
We
don't
have
anyone
on
the
zoom
bps.
Could
we
go
to
the
phone
lines
to
see
if
there's
anyone
there
in
opposition?
Please.
A
L
A
C
Thank
you,
chair
yeager.
I
considered
coming
up
in
public
comment
instead,
but
I
thought
I
would
take
you
know,
use
a
personal
privilege
to
thank
you
all
so
much
for
your
indulgence
and
allowing
me
to
present
your
committee
so
many
times
in
the
senate.
I
obviously
chair
our
judiciary
committee
and
I
sit
on
our
natural
resources
committee,
but
I
think
I
may
have
attended
more
assembly
judiciary
committee
meetings
than
senate
natural
resources.
C
So
thank
you
all
for
being
so
welcoming
and
working
with
me
throughout
this
year,
and
I
look
forward
to
working
with
all
of
you
in
the
interim
and
in
the
years
to
come
on
all
the
important
issues
that
we've
discussed
and
thank
you.
Thank
you,
chair
yeager,
my
assembly
member,
for
chairing
such
a
fantastic
committee.
That
does
the
great
work
of
for
the
people
of
the
state
of
nevada.
So
thank
you,
oh
and
please
do
pass
sb-164.
A
A
Okay,
we
are
in
work
session
and
we
have
a
motion
to
do
pass.
First,
let
me
let
me
ask
this:
are
there
any
questions
on
senate
bill
164?
Okay?
So
we
have
a
motion
to
do
pass
from
vice
chair
win.
I
think
we
had
like
12
people
make
a
second,
but
I
think
I
heard
a
assemblywoman
marzola,
so
we'll
give
her
the
second
any
discussion
on
the
motion.
A
Seeing
no
discussion,
all
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
aye
aye,
any
opposed,
nay
motion
carries
unanimously.
Congratulations
chair
this
bill
should
hit
the
floor
here
this
evening
and
enjoy
the
rest
of
your
day.
Thank
you
so
committee.
We
still
do
have
public
comment
because
we
had
a
meeting
here.
So
let
me
oh
floor
state.
Did
you
want
the
floor
statement?
Assemblyman
o'neil.
Is
that
what
you
were
volunteering
for?
A
Like
okay,
so
we're
going
to
move
to
public
comment
again.
30
minutes
for
public
comment.
Two
minutes
per
speaker
public
comments,
a
time
for
matters
of
general
nature
within
the
jurisdiction
of
the
assembly
judiciary
committee.
Nobody
left
in
the
room
with
us
bps.
Do
we
have
anyone
on
the
phone
for
public
comment.
L
L
N
N
A
L
A
Thank
you
bps.
I
will
close
public
comment
committee
members
when
we
met
yesterday,
we
didn't
know
if
we'd
have
another
meeting,
we
did
indeed
have
another
meeting.
There
is
an
agenda
for
tomorrow.
I
don't
know
if
we're
going
to
have
a
meeting,
we'll
see
stay
tuned,
but
for
now
again
I
want
to
thank
all
of
you
for
your
hard
work.
Thank
our
staff
for
their
hard
work
and
as
we
move
into
tomorrow,
which
you
all
know
is
memorial
day.
A
I
would
just
ask
that,
as
we
do
our
work
here,
we
think
about
those
who
have
been
lost
serving
our
country
and
their
family
members
and
hold
them
in
high
regards
as
we
are
able
to
do
this
work
in
the
legislature
because
of
people
like
that
that
have
fought
to
defend
our
way
of
life
and
our
freedoms
in
this
country.
So
as
we
go
into
tomorrow,
would
ask
you
to
keep
them
in
your
thoughts
and
prayers.