Reba's Law resurrected after expiring in legislative committee
Legislation that could land animal abusers in prison for as long as ten years passed out of the Assembly Judiciary Committee late Monday after it appeared to die last week without a vote before the Legislature's first deadline.
'Amendments come and go and change at rapid speed as we approach the deadline,' the committee's chairperson, Assemblywoman Brittany Miller said during Monday's work session, indicating her internal polling of committee members last week, as amendments were crafted in the final hours, did not bode well for the measure. 'At no time was there anyone who doesn't want to address the heinous crimes and acts of animal cruelty.'
Miller said lawmakers 'don't always have time to process' amendments, adding the committee was able to obtain a waiver allowing the Assembly Judiciary to vote Assembly Bill 381 out of committee. The bill, Reba's Law, was 'able to be resurrected,' Miller said, resulting in a 'much more intense, robust bill than we had before.'
The measure is named for Reba, a bulldog who died of heat stroke days after she was found in a sealed tote behind a business last summer.
An amendment from the Nevada District Attorneys Association eliminated provisions that would have allowed for the prosecution of individuals who allow the abuse of an animal.
The amendment also removes language requiring permission from the animal's owner or a veterinarian to euthanize an animal. It instead requires a peace officer to forfeit the animal to a local government if the owner does not request a hearing within a certain time frame, or cannot be found within five business days. The local government must then decide whether to euthanize the animal or transfer ownership to a rescue organization, shelter or individual.
Causing the death of an animal would be deemed a category B felony, and could land offenders in prison for one to ten years and a fine of not more than $10,000.
Clark County District Attorney Steve Wolfson complained last year he needed stiffer penalties to impose against animal abusers than those allowed by law. However, a review of cases prosecuted by Wolfson indicates he rarely seeks prison time, even in egregious cases.
Lynn Whatford, a Clark County resident who cared for community cats in her neighborhood, spent much of the last year seeking justice for a colony of two dozen cats she says disappeared one by one. She suspects her neighbor killed them.
Nevada Voters for Animals founder Gina Greisen told lawmakers that Wolfson declined to prosecute the case after Whatford discovered a trapped cat left in her neighbor's yard without protection from the sun and a high temperature of 114 degrees on July 25, the day the cat likely died. A veterinarian's post mortem examination noted 'it is clear (the cat) experienced extreme physical suffering in an inescapable situation, and that heat stroke is the likely cause of death in this case.'
Whatford complained to Clark County Animal Control for months that the cats were disappearing and that she heard cries coming from her neighbor's yard.
'Animal Control told me I needed proof, yet the officer couldn't access my neighbor's property to get the proof. Animal Control referred me to Metro, but the detective wouldn't do anything until I had proof,' Whatford said during an interview in September.
Greisen testified in support of the measure, but warned that without proper training and resources for police and animal control officers, stricter penalties will do little to help stem abuse and neglect.
Las Vegas justice activist Leslie Turner testified in opposition and said the measure is 'just another way to funnel more people into the criminal legal system,' and does nothing to address the causes of cruelty, including 'mental health struggles, childhood trauma, cycles of violence, economic instability.'
A one to ten year sentence, she noted, exceeds the one to six year sentence for child abuse. 'How can we justify punishing someone more harshly for harming an animal than for harming a child? What does this say about our priorities?' she asked in written testimony, adding lawmakers should instead invest in 'education, early intervention, and community-based mental health resources.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hamilton Spectator
7 hours ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Limited options for Democrats to retaliate if Texas Republicans redraw congressional map
WASHINGTON (AP) — As Republicans move to redraw legislative maps in red states to pad their narrow House majority in Washington, some Democrats are rethinking their embrace of a nonpartisan approach to line-drawing that now complicates their party's ability to hit back before next year's midterm elections. In many Democratic-controlled states, independent commissions rather than the state legislature handle redistricting, the normally-once-a-decade task of adjusting congressional and legislative districts so their populations are equal. Parties in the majority can exploit that process to shape their lawmakers' districts so they are almost guaranteed reelection. The commission model limits parties' ability to game the system, leading to more competitive districts. Not all redistricting commissions were created at Democrats' insistence. And, like Republicans, the party has exploited line-drawing for its own gain in the handful of states where it controls the process. But unlike Republicans, many Democratic Party leaders have embraced the nonpartisan model. That means Democrats have fewer options to match Republicans, who are redrawing the U.S. House map in Texas at President Donald Trump's urging to carve out as many as five new winnable seats for the GOP. That could be enough to prevent Democrats from winning back the majority next year. Democrats have threatened payback. During a gathering Friday in Wisconsin of Democratic governors, several of them said they wanted to retaliate because the stakes are so high. Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers, who has pushed for a nonpartisan redistricting commission in his state, said Democrats must 'do whatever we can' to counter the Republican efforts to redraw congressional maps. 'When you have a gun against your head, you've got to do something,' he said. Despite the ambitious talk, Democrats largely have their hands tied. Democratic states have limited ability to redistrict for political edge California Gov. Gavin Newsom has said he and the Democratic-controlled Legislature will try to redraw his state's congressional map. But they would need to repeal or defy the 2008 ballot measure creating an independent redistricting commission. Voters extended its authority to congressional districts two years later. Newsom supported the constitutional amendment at the time, when he was mayor of San Francisco. The Texas redistricting, which is expected to pass the Legislature next week, led him to modify that position. 'We can act holier than thou, we can sit on the sidelines, talk about the way the world should be, or we can recognize the existential nature that is this moment,' Newsom said earlier this month. In New York, which also has a commission, the state constitution bars another map this decade. Democrats have moved for a change, but that could not happen until 2027 at the earliest, and then only with voter approval. In other states where Democrats control the governor's office and legislature, including Colorado and Washington, the party has backed independent commissions that cannot redraw, let alone rig, maps in the middle of the decade. Democrats say 'foundations of our democracy' at stake When the redistricting cycle kicked off in 2021, after the last census, independent commissions were in charge of drawing 95 House seats that otherwise would have been drawn by Democrats, but only 13 that would have been created by Republicans. In a marker of the shift among Democrats, former Attorney General Eric Holder, who heads the party's redistricting effort and has called repeatedly for a more nonpartisan approach, seemed to bless his party's long shot efforts to overrule their commissions. 'We do not oppose – on a temporary basis – responsible, responsive actions to ensure that the foundations of our democracy are not permanently eroded,' Holder said in a statement last week. In states where they weren't checked by commissions, Democrats have redistricted just as ruthlessly as Republicans. In Illinois, they drew a map that gave them a 14-3 advantage in the congressional delegation. In New Mexico, they tweaked the map so they control all three House seats. In Nevada, they held three of its four seats in November despite Trump winning the state. Even in states where they have a lopsided advantage, Democrats are exploring ways to maximize it. On Friday, Maryland's House Majority Leader, Democratic Del. David Moon, said he would introduce legislation to trigger redrawing of the congressional lines if Texas moves forward. Democrats hold seven of the state's eight congressional seats. 'We can't have one state, especially a very large state, constantly trying to one-up and alter the course of congressional control while the other states sit idly by,' he said. Commissions promote 'fair representation,' advocates say Advocates of a nonpartisan model are alarmed by the shift among Democrats. They say the party would redistrict just as aggressively as the GOP if not held in check, depriving voters of a voice in districts whose winners would essentially be selected in advance by political leaders. 'We're very desperate — we're looking for any port in a storm,' said Emily Eby French, Common Cause's Texas director. 'This Democratic tit for tat redistricting seems like a port but it's not a port. It's a jagged rock with a bunch of sirens on them.' The group's director of redistricting, Dan Vicuña, said using redistricting for partisan advantage — known as gerrymandering — is highly unpopular with the public: 'This is about fair representation for communities.' Politicians used to shy away from discussing it openly, but that has changed in today's polarized environment. Trump earlier this month told reporters about his hopes of netting five additional GOP seats in Texas and more out of other Republican-controlled states. He has urged new maps in GOP-controlled states such as Indiana and Missouri, while Ohio Republicans are poised to reshape political lines after neutralizing a push to create an independent redistricting commission. Democrats are divided over how to respond to Texas In a sign of the party's divide, Democrats have continued to push for a national redistricting panel that would remove partisanship from the process, even as some call for retaliation against Republicans in defiance of state limitations. 'No unilateral disarmament till both sides are following the law,' said Arizona Sen. Ruben Gallego, like Newsom a possible 2028 presidential contender, wrote on X. Gallego's post came a day before his Democratic colleagues gathered to announce they were reintroducing a bill to create the national commission. An identical bill died in 2022 when it couldn't overcome Republican objections despite Democrats controlling Congress and the presidency. It has no chance now that the GOP is in charge of both branches. Sen. Chris Murphy, another potential 2028 contender, didn't express regret over past reforms that have implemented independent redistricting boards in Democratic states, saying the party 'should never apologize for being for the right thing.' But he added that Republicans 'are operating outside of the box right now and we can't stay inside the box.' 'If they're changing districts in the middle of the 10-year cycle, we have to do the same thing,' he said. That approach, however, hasn't caught on across the party. 'We shouldn't stoop to their tactics,' Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut said. 'It's an ideal that we have accurate and fair representation. We can't abandon it just because Republicans try to manipulate and distort it.' ___ Riccardi reported from Denver. Associated Press writers Scott Bauer in Madison, Wisconsin, Jaimie Ding in Los Angeles, Anthony Izaguirre in Albany, New York, and Brian Witte in Annapolis, Maryland, contributed to this report. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
San Francisco Chronicle
7 hours ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Limited options for Democrats to retaliate if Texas Republicans redraw congressional map
WASHINGTON (AP) — As Republicans move to redraw legislative maps in red states to pad their narrow House majority in Washington, some Democrats are rethinking their embrace of a nonpartisan approach to line-drawing that now complicates their party's ability to hit back before next year's midterm elections. In many Democratic-controlled states, independent commissions rather than the state legislature handle redistricting, the normally-once-a-decade task of adjusting congressional and legislative districts so their populations are equal. Parties in the majority can exploit that process to shape their lawmakers' districts so they are almost guaranteed reelection. The commission model limits parties' ability to game the system, leading to more competitive districts. Not all redistricting commissions were created at Democrats' insistence. And, like Republicans, the party has exploited line-drawing for its own gain in the handful of states where it controls the process. But unlike Republicans, many Democratic Party leaders have embraced the nonpartisan model. That means Democrats have fewer options to match Republicans, who are redrawing the U.S. House map in Texas at President Donald Trump's urging to carve out as many asfive new winnable seats for the GOP. That could be enough to prevent Democrats from winning back the majority next year. Democrats have threatened payback. During a gathering Friday in Wisconsin of Democratic governors, several of them said they wanted to retaliate because the stakes are so high. Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers, who has pushed for a nonpartisan redistricting commission in his state, said Democrats must 'do whatever we can' to counter the Republican efforts to redraw congressional maps. 'When you have a gun against your head, you've got to do something,' he said. Despite the ambitious talk, Democrats largely have their hands tied. Democratic states have limited ability to redistrict for political edge California Gov. Gavin Newsom has said he and the Democratic-controlled Legislature will try to redraw his state's congressional map. But they would need to repeal or defy the 2008 ballot measure creating an independent redistricting commission. Voters extended its authority to congressional districts two years later. Newsom supported the constitutional amendment at the time, when he was mayor of San Francisco. The Texas redistricting, which is expected to pass the Legislature next week, led him to modify that position. 'We can act holier than thou, we can sit on the sidelines, talk about the way the world should be, or we can recognize the existential nature that is this moment,' Newsom said earlier this month. In New York, which also has a commission, the state constitution bars another map this decade. Democrats have moved for a change, but that could not happen until 2027 at the earliest, and then only with voter approval. In other states where Democrats control the governor's office and legislature, including Colorado and Washington, the party has backed independent commissions that cannot redraw, let alone rig, maps in the middle of the decade. Democrats say 'foundations of our democracy' at stake When the redistricting cycle kicked off in 2021, after the last census, independent commissions were in charge of drawing 95 House seats that otherwise would have been drawn by Democrats, but only 13 that would have been created by Republicans. In a marker of the shift among Democrats, former Attorney General Eric Holder, who heads the party's redistricting effort and has called repeatedly for a more nonpartisan approach, seemed to bless his party's long shot efforts to overrule their commissions. 'We do not oppose – on a temporary basis – responsible, responsive actions to ensure that the foundations of our democracy are not permanently eroded,' Holder said in a statement last week. In states where they weren't checked by commissions, Democrats have redistricted just as ruthlessly as Republicans. In Illinois, they drew a map that gave them a 14-3 advantage in the congressional delegation. In New Mexico, they tweaked the map so they control all three House seats. In Nevada, they held three of its four seats in November despite Trump winning the state. Even in states where they have a lopsided advantage, Democrats are exploring ways to maximize it. On Friday, Maryland's House Majority Leader, Democratic Del. David Moon, said he would introduce legislation to trigger redrawing of the congressional lines if Texas moves forward. Democrats hold seven of the state's eight congressional seats. 'We can't have one state, especially a very large state, constantly trying to one-up and alter the course of congressional control while the other states sit idly by," he said. Commissions promote 'fair representation,' advocates say Advocates of a nonpartisan model are alarmed by the shift among Democrats. They say the party would redistrict just as aggressively as the GOP if not held in check, depriving voters of a voice in districts whose winners would essentially be selected in advance by political leaders. 'We're very desperate — we're looking for any port in a storm,' said Emily Eby French, Common Cause's Texas director. 'This Democratic tit for tat redistricting seems like a port but it's not a port. It's a jagged rock with a bunch of sirens on them.' The group's director of redistricting, Dan Vicuña, said using redistricting for partisan advantage — known as gerrymandering — is highly unpopular with the public: 'This is about fair representation for communities." Politicians used to shy away from discussing it openly, but that has changed in today's polarized environment. Trump earlier this month told reporters about his hopes of netting five additional GOP seats in Texas and more out of other Republican-controlled states. He has urged new maps in GOP-controlled states such as Indiana and Missouri, while Ohio Republicans are poised to reshape political lines after neutralizing a push to create an independent redistricting commission. Democrats are divided over how to respond to Texas In a sign of the party's divide, Democrats have continued to push for a national redistricting panel that would remove partisanship from the process, even as some call for retaliation against Republicans in defiance of state limitations. 'No unilateral disarmament till both sides are following the law,' said Arizona Sen. Ruben Gallego, like Newsom a possible 2028 presidential contender, wrote on X. Gallego's post came a day before his Democratic colleagues gathered to announce they were reintroducing a bill to create the national commission. An identical bill died in 2022 when it couldn't overcome Republican objections despite Democrats controlling Congress and the presidency. It has no chance now that the GOP is in charge of both branches. Sen. Chris Murphy, another potential 2028 contender, didn't express regret over past reforms that have implemented independent redistricting boards in Democratic states, saying the party "should never apologize for being for the right thing.' But he added that Republicans 'are operating outside of the box right now and we can't stay inside the box.' 'If they're changing districts in the middle of the 10-year cycle, we have to do the same thing,' he said. That approach, however, hasn't caught on across the party. 'We shouldn't stoop to their tactics,' Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut said. 'It's an ideal that we have accurate and fair representation. We can't abandon it just because Republicans try to manipulate and distort it.' ___ Riccardi reported from Denver. Associated Press writers Scott Bauer in Madison, Wisconsin, Jaimie Ding in Los Angeles, Anthony Izaguirre in Albany, New York, and Brian Witte in Annapolis, Maryland, contributed to this report.
Yahoo
19 hours ago
- Yahoo
Hearing held, no recall election date of Jackson County Executive set
KANSAS CITY, Mo. — A Jackson County judge wants to take the weekend to review testimony and other cases mentioned in arguments Friday, before coming to a decision, about a potential recall election date of Jackson County Executive Frank White Jr. Recently, two lawsuits seeking different outcomes were consolidated. One lawsuit demands the election be held at the end of this month, or as early as possible. The other, filed by two election offices, argues it's best to wait until November, such as November 4, since it's already a set election date. Kansas City air deemed 'unhealthy' as wildfire smoke casts haze across skies 'I think that all the parties agreed today, except for the County Executive. I don't think that he's going to agree with this, but I think one thing we all walked out knowing that there is going to be an election,' Attorney Phil LeVota shared with FOX4 Friday. Different perspectives and arguments surround when a recall election of Jackson County's Executive Frank White Jr. should take place if it were set to happen. 'My clients, the (Jackson County) citizens, are lock step with the Jackson County Legislature that it should be as soon as possible,' LeVota added. Friday, evidence was presented, and testimony was given. The election boards say they are committed to conducting a fair election and have no position on the recall, and add, in compliance with law, the next election date this could happen is November 4. They claim not enough time is given for alerting and securing polling locations, or finding an adequate number of polling judges, among other things. Council for County Executive Frank White Jr. says the process should be fair. White Jr. had no comment for FOX4 on Friday. 'My taxes went up 341%. I want the man gone. Gone from the county. Our people can't handle this. He has to go. The sooner, the better. People are being rooted out of their homes by Frank White,' Mark Anthony Jones, a Jackson County resident, said. Jones, a plaintiff, was unknowingly called to the stand on Friday. 'I am one of those 60,000 people who still haven't got our tax assessment figured out for 2023,' Jones added. OSHA investigating deadly collapse at Family Dollar in Kansas City One side argues the charter states it should take place within 60 days of receiving the signatures, or the next feasible date. Another says it's still an election and should fall on an already set election date, such as November 4. 'If that 10 weeks is an issue, that date could be September 30 or October 7. We don't believe we should fall back on, 'Well, there's one in November just waiting.' The people want a recall election. They want it expediently done. They want it quick,' LeVota shared. Others say there's harm in waiting and understand a recall election is rare. 'If they want to recall someone, they want to vote to take someone out of office. They don't want them to sit around for four more months still doing things that they don't think they should be doing,' LeVota added. A potential recall election date is anticipated for Monday or Tuesday of the coming week. LeVota is confident a date will likely be set soon. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Solve the daily Crossword
