Latest news with #Ohrenschall
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Health
- Yahoo
Lombardo vetoes trans protections bills, in contrast to previous session
Transgender rights activists and supporters participate in the Trans Day Of Visibility rally on the National Mall on March 31, 2025 in Washington City. (Photo by) Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo vetoed two bills this week that would have enshrined a shield law for health care providers who offer gender-affirming care and ensured protections for transgender people incarcerated at local jails. The vetoes come as President Donald Trump, who Lombardo supported in the election, has escalated attacks against the LGBTQ+ community in the first few months of his second term and issued several anti-trans orders, including one that blocked federal support for gender-affirming medical care to patients younger than 19. The governor 'turned his back on LGBTQ+ Nevadans and their families—vetoing two critical protections just days into Pride Month,' Silver State Equality State Director André Wade said in a statement. 'These bills would have provided critical protections to transgender people seeking healthcare and their medical providers, as well as to transgender people in our criminal justice system.' To the surprise of many LGBTQ organizers, Lombardo in 2023 signed legislation that prevented insurance companies from discriminating against trans people on the basis of gender identity and required the Nevada Department of Corrections to adopt regulations to protect trans and gender-nonconforming people in prison. The move at the time made him an outlier among Republican governors and legislatures, which have supported and passed bills targeting the trans and queer community. Gender-affirming care is supported by a variety of health providers and medical associations, including the American Academy of Pediatrics. But it has been a high-profile target, and several states, including Utah, have banned it. Democratic state Sen. James Ohrenschall has said prohibiting gender-affirming care will 'not only harm transgender individuals but create a climate of fear and uncertainty for health care providers who offer gender-affirming health care services.' Nevada law doesn't restrict medically necessary gender-affirming care, but many LGBTQ advocates and medical providers, including pediatricians, worried bans in other states could prevent trans youth from seeking care and doctors from providing it in Nevada. Ohrenschall brought legislation in 2023 that sought to enact a shield law for medical providers in Nevada but Lombardo vetoed the bill. With Senate Bill 171, Ohrenschall used the same language from the 2023 bill to yet again try to bolster protections for medical providers who offer gender-affirming care. It would have prevented a medical licensing board from punishing or disqualifying providers. The bill passed both the Senate and Assembly in party line votes. 'This bill was a clear opportunity to ensure that transgender Nevadans can access the care they need—and that providers can offer it without fear of legal retaliation,' Wade said. 'Transgender people in Nevada deserve safety, dignity, and access to life-saving health care. The Governor's decision puts all of that at risk.' In his veto message, Lombardo wrote that the bill 'would lead to complicated legal battles and uncertainty about what laws providers must follow' and put medical 'licensing boards in the awkward position of navigating potentially conflicting mandates in federal and state law.' The message was similar to his 2023 veto. The second trans bill vetoed by Lombardo, Senate Bill 141 would have required local detention facilities to develop policies that address the custody, housing, medical and mental health treatment of transgender, gender non-conforming, and intersex people incarcerated. Democratic state Sen. Melanie Scheible, who sponsored the bill, said during its hearing it was similar to legislation she brought in 2023 that required prisons to enact similar policies for trans people who were incarcerated. Lombardo signed that bill. All 15 Assembly Republicans joined Democrats to unanimously pass SB 141, but the Senate voted along party lines. In his veto message Lombardo acknowledged that he did 'which authorized the Director of the Department of Corrections to implement similar policies through regulation with Board of Prison Commissioners' approval.' 'Federal authority in this space is potentially evolving and, if altered, could conflict with the provisions of this bill leading to decreased state and local access to vital federal funding,' he wrote.
Yahoo
08-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Legislation would extend review period between death warrant and execution
State Sen. James Ohrenschall said he 'personally doesn't support the death penalty' and would rather see it abolished, but the legislation would at least ensure attorneys have an adequate amount of time to litigate issues once a death warrant is issued. (Photo: Jeniffer Solis/Nevada Current) Four years after state lawmakers failed to pass legislation to abolish the death penalty, despite having a Democratic trifecta, a bill this year would extend the time period for carrying out a potential execution. Nevada law currently calls for an execution to take place between 60 and 90 days after an execution is warranted. Senate Bill 350, sponsored by Democratic state Sen. James Ohrenschall of Las Vegas, would lengthen the timeframe to between 180 and 270 days. Ohrenschall said he 'personally doesn't support the death penalty' and would rather see it abolished. There have been 23 states that have abolished the death penalty, citing concerns including but not limited to racial disparities in the number of death row inmates, the high costs of capital cases going to trial, and documented likely instances of people being put to death after wrongful convictions, as well as people being exonerated while on death row. The legislation seeks to ensure attorneys have an adequate amount of time to litigate any issues that arise once an execution is ordered, Ohrenschall said. The legislation would also ensure that there is only one execution warrant that would be pending in Nevada at any given time. 'In Nevada, unlike other states, an execution warrant is issued by the district judge in the county where the conviction occurred,' said David Anthony, an attorney who specializes in capital cases who alongside Ohrenschall described the bill to a legislative panel. 'In many other states, execution warrants are issued by a single entity.' The bill passed out of the Senate April 21 on a 13-8 party-line vote. The legislation was heard Wednesday by the Assembly Judiciary Committee. Nevada hasn't executed anyone since 2006. The state tried, and failed, to execute Scott Dozier in 2017. A lengthy legal battle over the drugs being used to kill Dozier resulted in the execution being postponed until he died by suicide in early 2019. Ohrenschall, along with Democratic Assembly Speaker Steve Yeager, both introduced separate bills in 2021 to abolish the state's death penalty. Former Democratic Gov. Steve Sisolak said at the time he had a 'hard time with the idea of a complete abolition' and thought executions should be reserved for extreme cases. Despite uncertainty on whether Sisolak would sign a bill abolishing the death penalty, the Nevada Assembly voted 26-16 in a party line vote to advance Yeager's bill. The legislation then stalled in the Senate Judiciary Committee and died without getting another vote. Anthony said SB 350 represented 'a common sense reform that helps bring the law into conformity with what the actual practice is in litigating capital cases.' While there are ways for people to appeal their cases and delay their execution, 'there are certain constitutional rights that cannot be litigated until there is an execution warrant,' he said. The bill, Anthony said, would also give the Nevada Department of Corrections additional time to complete all the protocols statutorily required prior to an execution, including mental health evaluations and health exams. NDOCDirector James Dzurenda told lawmakers Wednesday the logistics of training staff, notifying victims and procuring the drugs for an execution is hard to accomplish in a short time period. The logistics for planning more than one execution concurrently would be 'a nightmare process for corrections,' he added. 'What we do is we prepare,' Dzurenda said. 'Even right now we are preparing for an execution in case we get one next week. That's a lot of wasted taxpayer money. If we had an extension at the beginning of an execution we could prepare when we get a warrant. Right now we have to prepare before we get a warrant.' There are currently 59 people on death row in Nevada according to the Death Penalty Information Center. But Dzurenda also said that if the timeframe is extended 'too much could actually hurt the process' and opens the possibility for 'appeals that may not have been necessary in my eyes or get these far fetched appeals that could stretch out an execution.' Similar to efforts to get rid of the death penalty, the Nevada District Attorneys Association opposed efforts to change the timeframe for carrying out executions. Jennifer Noble, a lobbyist with the association who testified against the bill Wednesday, said there is already a lengthy and robust process for people to challenge and appeal their guilty verdict as well as the death sentence. 'This bill will not make anything easier on victims,' Noble said. Nevada Attorneys for Criminal Justice, in a letter supporting Ohrenschall's legislation, wrote it wouldn't lead to unnecessary delays but 'rather reflect the time actually needed to ensure due process at a time when the stakes could not be higher.' Mark Bettencourt, the executive director with the Nevada Coalition Against the Death Penalty, said while the coalition was still pursuing an end to the death penalty, the legislation was a 'common sense bill' to ensure that if an execution was carried out it wasn't rushed. 'It's been almost 20 years since we've had an execution in this state,' he said. 'To rush that now risks a botched execution and taking the life of an innocent person.'
