Senate Committee Hears Proposal to Add Appointed Statewide Business Court to Nevada Constitution

Assembly members and legal experts presented Assembly Joint Resolution 8 on May 1, 2025, proposing a constitutional amendment to authorize a statewide appointed business court to hear complex intra‑ and inter‑business disputes.

Supporters said the court would give Nevada a more predictable forum for corporate litigation and make the state more competitive for incorporations and corporate relocations. Assemblymember Joe Dalia (sponsor) told the committee the amendment would authorize the Legislature to establish an appointed business court with judges selected by a nominating commission, six‑year terms, retention ballots for the public and a chief judge appointed by the state supreme court chief justice.

Professor Benjamin Edwards of UNLV’s William S. Boyd School of Law testified the measure addresses a competitive disadvantage relative to states with specialized business benches. He said Delaware’s Court of Chancery and recently created Texas business court help drive where companies choose to incorporate because of judicial expertise and predictability. Edwards cited two data points he presented to the committee: reported Delaware annual business‑formation revenue above $2 billion and Nevada’s commercial recordings revenue of approximately $211 million in 2024; he also noted longer average disposition times in Nevada business dockets compared with Delaware’s chancery statistics.

Business groups, economic development organizations and the Secretary of State’s commercial recordings division offered support. John Sandy of Las Vegas Sands, Brian Wachter (representing NFIB and the Las Vegas Chamber), and others said an appointed business court could attract headquarters and high‑value incorporations, with downstream job and revenue effects. Deputy Secretary of State Deanna Reynolds said commercial recordings are a major revenue source and that Nevada is already growing entity filings.

Opponents and several judges raised concerns about structure, cost and judicial independence. Chief Justice Douglas Herndon said the judicial branch supports dedicated business dockets but cautioned that a standalone statewide court untethered from judicial districts could create fiscal and administrative costs (staff, clerks, marshals, facilities) that would fall to the state. Chief Judge Lynn Jones (Second Judicial District) and others urged exploring ways to expand or resource existing district business dockets rather than create a separate statewide court. Several senators questioned appointment mechanics, nominating‑commission membership, whether terms should be staggered and how to preserve partisan balance or other safeguards.

Assemblymember Dalia said the resolution intentionally leaves details to a subsequent implementing statute and has a funding condition (legislature “may” provide funds). He and supporters said a streamlined appointment process and six‑year terms would produce bench stability attractive to corporations. Opponents recommended additional language on nominating‑commission composition, staggered appointments and financial analysis before placing an amendment on the ballot.

The committee received both organized business support and judicial concerns; no formal vote on AJR 8 occurred during the hearing.

Ending: If the Senate approves AJR 8 this session, the resolution would require a future implementing bill (likely in a later legislative session) and voter approval before becoming part of the Nevada Constitution.