ACLU of Nevada v. Las Vegas Metro. Police Dep't
What's at Stake
In 2025, without authorization from the Nevada Legislature, the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department (LVMPD) entered into an agreement with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) that purports to let LVMPD assist with federal immigration enforcement. This “287(g) agreement” provides that, at ICE’s request, LVMPD will continue detaining a person after they are supposed to be released from criminal custody to make it easier for ICE to pick them up. That is exactly what happened to Sergio Morais-Hechavarria: although a court had ordered him to be released to an inpatient treatment program, LVMPD continued detaining him for another two months at ICE’s behest. Mr. Morais-Hechavarria and the ACLU of Nevada filed a lawsuit challenging LVMPD’s authority to enter into the 287(g) agreement and to detain people for ICE after their criminal custody ends. The district court dismissed the case, and the ACLU’s State Supreme Court Initiative and ACLU of Nevada have appealed to the Nevada Supreme Court.
Summary
In June 2025, LVMPD entered into a 287(g) agreement (“Agreement”) with ICE that purports to authorize LVMPD to hold immigration detainees for the federal government for up to 48 hours beyond the end of their criminal custody. Although Nevada law does not allow local law enforcement agencies to unilaterally enter into 287(g) agreements, LVMPD did so without seeking the Legislature’s authorization.
Under the Agreement, the LVMPD detained Mr. Morais-Hechavarria even though a criminal court had ordered his release. After almost two months of this unlawful detention, Mr. Morais-Hechavarria and the ACLU of Nevada sued. Three days later, LVMPD abruptly transferred Mr. Morais-Hechavarria into ICE custody, causing him to be deported, in an apparent attempt to moot the case. The district court subsequently held that Mr. Morais-Hechavarria lacked standing to sue, the ACLU of Nevada lacked standing to challenge the Agreement in the public interest, and Mr. Morais-Hechavarria’s transfer rendered all their claims moot.
The ACLU’s State Supreme Court Initiative and the ACLU of Nevada appealed to the Nevada Supreme Court, arguing that (1) Mr. Morais-Hechavarria has standing to sue because, when the lawsuit was filed, he was being unlawfully detained pursuant to the ICE hold; (2) the ACLU of Nevada has standing to sue under Nevada’s public-importance doctrine because its claims raise the important question whether LVMPD violated the separation of powers by entering into the Agreement without legislative authorization; and (3) the case was not mooted by Mr. Morais Hechavarria’s transfer because the issues raised are capable of repetition, yet evading review—the evidence shows that LVMPD has been detaining hundreds of people for ICE under the Agreement.
We are asking the Court to also hold that the Agreement—and LVMPD’s actions under it—are unlawful on the merits. We argue that Nevada’s Constitution and statutes do not permit LVMPD to enter into 287(g) agreements without the Legislature’s authorization, detain people for the federal government for civil immigration violations, or make civil immigration arrests.
Legal Documents
-
09/17/2026
ACLU and ACLU-NV (Appellants') Opening Brief -
09/17/2026
Appellant Appendix VOL 1 -
09/17/2026
Appellant Appendix VOL 2
Date Filed: 09/17/2026
Court: Nevada Supreme Court
Affiliate: Nevada
Download DocumentDate Filed: 09/17/2026
Court: Nevada Supreme Court
Affiliate: Nevada
Download DocumentDate Filed: 09/17/2026
Court: Nevada Supreme Court
Affiliate: Nevada
Download Document