Proposed ‘second look' law would allow some lengthy prison sentences to be reviewed
"This is not a get out of jail free card," said the bill's sponsor, Democratic Assemblymember Erica Roth. (Legislative stream screengrab)
In the last few legislative sessions, Nevada has seen reforms to the criminal legal system to ensure certain crimes, such as low-level drug offenses, don't lead to lengthy sentences.
State lawmakers should also consider a process to review the sentences of those who have already been incarcerated for a prolonged period of time, says Democratic Assemblymember Erica Roth.
Assembly Bill 91, deemed 'second look' legislation, would create an avenue for those incarcerated to have sentences reviewed by the State Board of Parole Commissioners after they've served extended periods of time.
'We as a body and legislators have realized that placing somebody in prison for extreme amounts of time does not necessarily meet the public policy goals, especially when they have been rehabilitated,' Roth, a Reno Democrat, said during hearing on the bill earlier this month.
AB 91 passed out of the Assembly Judiciary Committee April 11 in a party line vote but hasn't been heard in the Assembly.
It has until Tuesday to receive a vote in the Assembly. Except for bills declared exempt, legislation must be passed in its house of origin by then to move forward.
Lawmakers in previous years have sought to address the growing prison population by revising sentencing guidelines and bolstering diversion programs. A 2019 bill that passed with bipartisan support reduced penalties for non-violent theft and drug crimes while increasing access to speciality court programs.
Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo has tried to roll back those provisions, but with only limited success. He's proposing more punitive measures this session that include increasing penalties for drug dealers and curtailing early discharge from probation for gun violations.
Lombardo's efforts to pass tougher actions come as the Nevada Department of Corrections faces a $50 million budget shortfall during a session in which lawmakers are growing more and more apprehensive about the prospects of reduced revenue as a result of a slowing economy. The bill is also likely to face challenges from a Legislature controlled by many of the same Democrats who passed the criminal justice reforms Lombardo has targeted.
Meanwhile, state lawmakers in the interim session voted to pursue a 'second look' authorizing sentencing review boards to re-evaluate some sentences.
The legislation's proponents note it not only addresses the far-reading societal harms inflicted by mass incarceration, it is also a way to reduce the prison population, which could alleviate financial strains.
There have been 13 states along with the District of Columbia that have passed similar 'second look' review policies, according to the Sentencing Project, a nonprofit research and advocacy organization.
The Nevada legislation also allows the parole board to 'grant a second look review' for people convicted of Category A offenses, which include murder and sexual assault, provided the incarcerated person has served 25 years. For category B felonies, such as robbery and assault with a deadly weapon, they must have served at least 15 years.
Lawmakers were told during interim legislative hearings last year that of the slightly less than 11,000 people incarcerated by the Nevada Department of Corrections, 1,888 were sentenced to more than 15 years, and of those, 1,272 people currently incarcerated have already served 15 years.
Those serving life sentences, sentenced to death or deemed as 'a significant and articulable risk to public safety' wouldn't be eligible for consideration.
The bill also expands opportunities for parole for people convicted of crimes before turning 25, opportunities currently only extended to those who committed crimes before 18.
'Research shows individuals tend to age out of high crime years as they mature, making extended incarceration less effective in reducing recidivism,' Roth said. 'Second look policies also recognize the developmental difference between youth and adults, aligning again with national reforms that provide greater opportunities for youth offenders.'
Republican Assemblyman Ken Gray, of Dayton, questioned why the state needed to provide additional ways for inmates to attempt to reduce their sentences.
'There's a lot of different avenues you can go through with your attorney,' he said. 'It just seems like we're just adding more and more ways to challenge what, at the time, is a fair sentence.'
While there are ways for people to challenge the constitutionality of the case or any issue associated with the trial, there aren't many ways for people to challenge or review the sentence itself, Roth said.
The bill was supported by public defenders throughout the state.
'Twenty five years, 15 years, is a long time,' said Angela Knott, a public defender with Washoe County. 'AB 91 reflects the belief that people shouldn't be defined by their worst actions. It gives those who have truly changed, who have grown up and matured, a chance to prove their potential for a positive contribution to society.'
The prison rights advocacy group Return Strong and the Nevada Coalition Against the Death Penalty, though not opposing the bill, said it falls short.
'Building mechanisms for people to have an opportunity and hope for freedom is a huge motivator for change,' said Nicole Williams, a board member with Return Strong. But the bill, she said, doesn't go far enough since it excludes people serving life without parole sentences.
'This exclusion fails to account for individuals who were sentenced under outdated policies, extreme sentencing practices, who were targeted by racist law, or those who have demonstrated remarkable rehabilitation while incarcerated,' Williams said.
District Attorneys and law enforcement agencies opposed the bill.
Jennifer Noble, a lobbyist with Nevada District Attorneys Association, specifically cited provisions allowing a second look for those convicted of sexual assault and murder.
She agreed it's not a 'foregone conclusion' that those convicted of such crimes would win release, the process itself could come at the expense of victims.
'To ensure victims will be heard as required by the constitution … they have to be notified, they have to decide whether to participate, they have to relieve these events and they have to be retraumatized,' Noble said. 'Lawful sentences should not be second guessed every two years each time an offender can file a new petition under this bill.'
Roth said there is nothing in the bill that prevents the parole board from considering the person's crime and the impact of victims. It simply asks the review board to consider 'how old they were, how much they've changed, what they've accomplished', she said.
'At the end of the day, this is not a get out of jail free card,' Roth said. 'This is an opportunity for the board, who already makes these reviews on a daily basis, to consider a human being and who they are holistically.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
27 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Meet the unorthodox governor who could be the MAHA movement's favorite Democrat
Over his years in politics, Polis has — if nothing else — stood out. Advertisement A wealthy tech entrepreneur, he bankrolled early efforts to turn Colorado into a Democratic stronghold before running for office himself — first for Congress, where he served five terms. In 2018, he became the first openly gay man to win a state governorship. Since taking office, he's pursued an agenda with centrist, libertarian, and progressive threads, prioritizing cutting taxes but also making kindergarten fully free in the state. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Now, Polis is distinguishing himself as a rare Democrat willing to engage with In an interview with the Globe on Tuesday, Polis declined to praise or criticize Kennedy directly — or talk about him much at all — when asked to assess the secretary's performance. Advertisement Polis expressed 'skepticism and concern with regard to casting aspersions on vaccines that are absolutely critical to protect health and reduce deadly disease incidence.' But where many Democrats have avoided engaging with the 'I mean, we're a proud part of the United States of America, so of course, we're going to work with our own federal government,' Polis said. 'So that means … playing defense where we need to, and it also means seeking opportunities where we can.' The governor argued that as he works with the administration, he's also 'trying to defend and improve and increase vaccine use' and fight sweeping SNAP cuts proposed by Trump's allies in Congress. As Democrats anxiously search for new leaders to meet this moment, Polis has attracted speculation as a contender for the presidency in 2028. And he hasn't exactly shunned the attention. Asked about a presidential campaign, Polis told the Globe that he's 'not thinking about any other job' and that he's focused on 'running through the tape to deliver' as governor until he leaves in January 2027. But he didn't rule out the possibility. Senator John Hickenlooper, the previous Democratic governor of Colorado, predicted that Polis — whom he praised as a 'leader among Democrats' — will 'stay actively engaged' after leaving the governorship. 'He addresses each issue as a unique issue, and he doesn't worry about what other people said or what other people think,' Hickenlooper said. Advertisement Polis may not worry about it, but he draws strong — and often polarizing — reactions in Colorado. In recent years, he's alienated some fellow Democrats, raising doubts about how solid his base would be if he pursued national office. Howard Chou, a former state party vice chair and a Colorado delegate to the Democratic National Committee, argued Polis has become 'very unpopular' within his own party. His openness to Kennedy hasn't helped. 'I'm OK with working with people to get stuff done,' said Chou, 'but also to facilitate some of Kennedy's craziness has not gone off well.' One of Polis's more controversial moves was his recent vetoes of Democratic-backed legislation, especially a bill that would have Through a spokesman, Colorado Democratic Party Chair Shad Murib, who participated in demonstrations against Polis's labor stance, declined to be interviewed. Polis told the Globe he has 'very strong' relationships with Democrats and downplayed any lingering differences. Meanwhile, some Colorado Republicans appreciate his independent streak. 'One of the things I really like about Governor Polis is the fact that he doesn't have to accept every aspect of somebody in order to find the things he can connect with them on,' said Kelly Maher, a GOP strategist who previously worked on efforts to defeat Polis. Polis's unconventional approach, and his interest in issues now close to the MAHA movement, dates back to his time in Congress. In 2015, he was a lead co-sponsor of bipartisan legislation to legalize the sale and shipment of raw milk across state lines. He's since attempted to legalize raw milk in Colorado as governor. Advertisement Broadly, Polis may reflect Colorado's liberal but libertarian-tinged politics as well as its environmentally focused and health-conscious populace — the type of milieu from which Kennedy emerged in the first place. And nowhere in the state are those tendencies stronger than in Polis's hometown of Boulder, In his first year as governor, Polis opposed Democratic-backed legislation intended to increase childhood vaccine uptake in Colorado, objecting to a provision requiring parents to seek a child's vaccine exemption from officials in person. The bill never became law. After the COVID-19 pandemic hit, Polis advocated for the new vaccines and blamed misinformation for packing hospitals with unvaccinated people. 'It's just like, science solved this thing but then people screwed up the solution,' he said in an interview at the time. But the governor also became an early Democrat to lift masking requirements. In welcoming Kennedy's appointment, Polis credited him with opposing vaccine mandates and felt he would 'shake up' the nation's public health establishment. Now, with Colorado's The governor said he only met Kennedy once, at a national governors' event, but that he has worked more closely with Rollins, a self-described 'MAHA mom.' Rollins began working with a handful of governors to align states with MAHA priorities by encouraging them to exclude sugary drinks and other 'ultra-processed' foods from food stamp eligibility. Among the first nine governors to request waivers, Polis was the lone Democrat. Advertisement Noting Colorado is 'a very health-conscious state,' Polis said he was interested in pursuing the waiver as a 'powerful and compelling way to drive down health care costs by reducing chronic disease and preventing diet-related illness.' There's debate among nutrition experts over the possible impacts. Kate Bauer, an associate professor at the University of Michigan who studies SNAP, argued that such waivers 'make life hard for SNAP users and make people not want to be in the program.' As for Polis, he sees more opportunities to work with MAHA, telling the Globe he supports Kennedy's efforts to ban artificial food dyes that have been linked to some health risks. Ted Trimpa, a Colorado Democratic strategist who has known Polis for decades, said that 'what makes Jared authentic' is that he 'understands you have to work with people you don't necessarily agree with.' 'We can't wave a wand and make RFK Jr. go away. You can either try to find glimmers of hope in the craziness … or not,' he added. 'Jared is willing to walk down that path and some politicians aren't. But that's what makes him different.' Sam Brodey can be reached at
San Francisco Chronicle
27 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Trump ignites debate on presidential authority with Iran strikes and wins praise from Republicans
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump's bombardment of three sites in Iran quickly sparked debate in Congress over his authority to launch the strikes, with Republicans praising Trump for decisive action even as many Democrats warned he should have sought congressional approval. 'Well done, President Trump,' Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina posted on X. Alabama Sen. Katie Britt called the bombings 'strong and surgical.' The Senate Armed Services Committee chairman, Roger Wicker of Mississippi, said Trump 'has made a deliberate — and correct — decision to eliminate the existential threat posed by the Iranian regime.' The instant divisions in the U.S. Congress reflected an already swirling debate over the president's ability to conduct such a consequential action without authorization from the House and Senate on the use of military force. While Trump is hardly the first U.S. president to go it alone, his expansive use of presidential power raised immediate questions about what comes next, and whether he is exceeding the limits of his authority. 'This was a massive gamble by President Trump, and nobody knows yet whether it will pay off,' said Rhode Island Sen. Jack Reed, the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee. Democrats, and a few Republicans, said the strikes were unconstitutional, and demanded more information in a classified setting. Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer of New York said that he received only a 'perfunctory notification' without any details, according to a spokesperson. 'No president should be allowed to unilaterally march this nation into something as consequential as war with erratic threats and no strategy,' Schumer said in a statement. 'Confronting Iran's ruthless campaign of terror, nuclear ambitions, and regional aggression demands strength, resolve, and strategic clarity.' House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries said that Trump 'misled the country about his intentions, failed to seek congressional authorization for the use of military force and risks American entanglement in a potentially disastrous war in the Middle East.' The quick GOP endorsements of stepped up U.S. involvement in Iran came after Trump publicly considered the strikes for days and many congressional Republicans had cautiously said they thought he would make the right decision. The party's schism over Iran could complicate the GOP's efforts to boost Pentagon spending as part of a $350 billion national security package in Trump's 'big, beautiful' tax breaks bill, which is speeding toward votes next week. 'We now have very serious choices ahead to provide security for our citizens and our allies,' Wicker posted on X. House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and Senate Majority Leader John Thune both were briefed ahead of the strikes on Saturday, according to people familiar with the situation and granted anonymity to discuss it. Thune said Saturday evening that 'as we take action tonight to ensure a nuclear weapon remains out of reach for Iran, I stand with President Trump and pray for the American troops and personnel in harm's way.' Johnson said in a statement that the military operations 'should serve as a clear reminder to our adversaries and allies that President Trump means what he says.' House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rick Crawford, R-Ark., said he had also been in touch with the White House and 'I am grateful to the U.S. servicemembers who carried out these precise and successful strikes." Breaking from many of his Democratic colleagues, Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, an outspoken supporter of Israel, also praised the attacks on Iran. 'As I've long maintained, this was the correct move by @POTUS,' he posted. 'Iran is the world's leading sponsor of terrorism and cannot have nuclear capabilities.' Both parties have seen splits in recent days over the prospect of striking Iran, including some of Trump's most ardent supporters who share his criticism of America's 'forever wars.' Republican Rep. Warren Davidson of Ohio posted that 'while President Trump's decision may prove just, it's hard to conceive a rationale that's Constitutional." Kentucky Rep. Thomas Massie, a longtime opponent of U.S. involvement in foreign wars, also posted on X that 'This is not Constitutional.' 'This is not our fight,' said Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia. Most Democrats have maintained that Congress should have a say, even as presidents in both parties have ignored the legislative branch's constitutional authority. The Senate was scheduled to vote soon on a resolution from Virginia Sen. Tim Kaine that would require congressional approval before the U.S. declares war on Iran or takes specific military action. 'I will push for all senators to vote on whether they are for this third idiotic Middle East war,' Kaine said. Democratic Rep. Greg Casar, the chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, also called on Congress to immediately pass a war powers resolution. He said politicians had always promised that 'new wars in the Middle East would be quick and easy.' 'Then they sent other people's children to fight and die endlessly,' Casar said. "Enough.'
The Hill
33 minutes ago
- The Hill
DNC leader faces growing scrutiny amid party turmoil
Democratic National Committee (DNC) Chair Ken Martin is under pressure amid growing turmoil within the party's ranks six months into President Trump's second administration. The committee has been plagued by party infighting that has spilled out into the open in recent weeks. Last week, two influential union heads — American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten and American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees President Lee Saunders — stepped down from their posts at the committee. Meanwhile, former Vice Chair David Hogg announced he would not run for his post again amid internal disagreements with party leadership. And on top of the infighting, reports have surfaced the committee is strapped for cash amid frustration among donors. The developments have painted a picture of weakness, barring Democrats from fully uniting behind Trump. Some critics argue the issues can be traced back to Martin, but others insist it's a reflection of the Democratic ecosystem as a whole. 'Ken Martin is stepping into a really difficult situation right now, and I would say he was elected and they handed him a mop and a bucket,' said Brian Lemek, a Democratic strategist and founder and executive director of Defend the Vote. Martin assumed his position in the top role at the DNC in February after defeating then-Wisconsin Democratic Party Chair Ben Wikler in a competitive chair's race. His election came months after the party's sweeping losses across the board in 2024. His allies note Martin hit the ground running, unveiling his 50-state strategy in April. Martin pledged the DNC would donate a baseline of $17,500 to state parties and territories, marking a $5,000-per-month increase over the committee's previous contribution. Martin has also seen a number of special election victories during his tenure, including in Iowa, Nebraska and Pennsylvania. 'The man is everywhere,' said New Jersey-based DNC member Laura Matos, noting Martin's recent trip to the state, which is holding its governor's race in November. 'New Jersey doesn't regularly get the love and the attention for the purposes of the things we have going on here,' she said. 'He kicked off canvasses when he was here.' Still, recent polling paints a picture of a deeply unsatisfied Democratic base. A Reuters/Ipsos poll released Thursday found 62 percent of Democrats said 'party leaders should be replaced.' Forty-nine percent of Democratic respondents said they were 'unsatisfied with current leadership,' while 41 percent said they disagreed with the sentiment that they were unsatisfied with leadership. And most of the coverage surrounding the committee has been dominated by intraparty fighting that has spilled out into the open, something Democratic lawmakers are cognizant of. In a post on the social platform X following Weingarten's exit earlier this week, Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) said he wants 'to build a party with a big tent and inclusion, not subtraction and pushing people out.' '[Weingarten] understands the need for trades schools & apprenticeships more than anyone in our party [and Hogg] the need for primary competition and generational change,' Khanna said. And earlier this month, Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) said on X he 'would love to see a day go by that the DNC doesn't do something embarrassing and off-message' ahead of the vote to redo Hogg and Pennsylvania state Sen. Malcolm Kenyatta's (D) vice chair elections. 'Everyone should be focused on killing the cuts to healthcare & food assistance & education. And everyone should focus on next November,' Pocan said, adding 'internal bullshit done externally is stupid.' New York state Sen. James Skoufis (D), who ran against Martin for chair earlier this year and is a member of the committee's People's Cabinet, said Hogg is at 'the nexus' of the intraparty tensions. 'There's a lot of noise being generated by a very small handful of what I'll call backbiters who have some axe to grind,' Skoufis said. Saunders and Weingarten endorsed Wikler in the party chair's race earlier this year, and both were later removed by Martin from the DNC's influential Rules and Bylaws Committee. Both cited disagreements with Martin in their letters announcing their departures. Not every member who was removed by Martin from the Rules and Bylaws Committee has taken that approach. Florida state Sen. Shevrin Jones (D), who is a DNC member who was removed from the committee by Martin, said he still backs the chair. Jones argued that the internal tensions spilling out into the open only serve as a distraction for Democrats in their battle to take on Trump and Republicans. 'I think people need to separate their emotion from the work that needs to be done because the infighting that we're seeing, it's taking our focus off of the bigger picture at hand,' Jones told The Hill. 'For us to be in this moment and we're wasting our time talking about power and position when we should be talking about policy and people. That is how we're going to win elections,' he said. John Verdejo, a North Carolina-based DNC member who supports Martin, said the changes Martin brought with him to the committee are to be expected given the switch-up in leadership. 'I attribute that to real life where there's new management and when new management comes into any work situation, they want to change things up the way they see fit and that's what happened, especially in the case of the two labor presidents,' Verdejo said. 'Our problem is we're so quick, DNC members, or Democrats, really, if we want to complain, instead of complaining to the person aggrieved us, in this case Ken Martin, we're so quick to tweet it out or talk to the press about it instead of talking to the person that aggrieved us,' he continued. The DNC has also been subject to questions about its finances as it prepares for the midterms next year. The committee entered May with $18 million cash on hand, compared to the Republican National Committee, which started the month with $67.4 million in the bank. Additionally, in the first four months of 2025, only three donors gave $100,000 or more to the committee. A New York Times report published earlier this week highlighted reported concerns from Democrats about the committee's finances, but others note the smaller dollar donors should not be ignored. 'The DNC historically has too exclusively prioritized larger donors at the expense of smaller donors and that is no longer happening,' Skoufis said. On Friday, the committee announced it had raised $40 million during Martin's first four months as chair. In May, the DNC said it outpaced grassroots fundraising in May 2023 and 2024 and raised twice as much in grassroots dollars compared to May 2017. 'Powered by our grassroots community, the DNC has just set a new record for most money raised in the first four months under a new Chair — ever,' Martin said in a statement. 'What matters is winning elections, making Democrats competitive everywhere, expanding our tent, and putting our party on the right path.' Others within the DNC say the lower-than-usual numbers from larger donors are to be expected following 2024. 'Large donors made it clear that they were not going to give to the DNC until we got our act together. I think we knew that going into this,' Jones said, adding he believes donors will come back. 'But they're not going to come back if they still see a disconnect internally,' he said.
