A $6,811.33 bill and a body-camera request that sat unanswered for more than a year have put the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department at the center of a new transparency lawsuit. The ACLU of Nevada says the department’s fees and policies create a paywall around records the public has a right to inspect.
According to KTNV, the ACLU filed the case in state court after requesting body-camera footage from a June 11, 2025, protest. The Marshall Project joined the lawsuit, which claims LVMPD demanded the upfront payment before processing the request, then stopped responding after the ACLU tried to narrow the scope and reduce the cost.
The filing says that by July 30, more than 13 months after the original request, LVMPD still had not responded. It also alleges the department charged about $85 per hour in one invoice, then switched to $5.67 per minute and later $5.80 per minute for the same type of footage. “Government willfully passes on regular operating costs,” ACLU of Nevada Executive Director Athar Haseebullah said, according to KTNV.
LVMPD’s Posted Rates Have Changed Again
LVMPD’s own public-records page says the department provides identifiable records, including body-worn camera video, under Nevada’s Public Records Act. The page lists an $89-per-hour charge for body-camera preparation, research and redaction effective July 1, 2026, along with separate research and redaction fees that can vary.
The department also says additional personnel costs may be charged under Nevada law. That posted schedule does not resolve the lawsuit’s claims, but it shows why the dispute is not merely about one unusually large invoice: the ACLU is challenging how rates are calculated, applied and communicated to different requesters.
What the Lawsuit Could Cost Metro
The ACLU is asking a judge to find that LVMPD willfully violated the Nevada Public Records Act and to impose civil penalties under NRS 239.340. The Nevada Legislature says that statute requires a $1,000 penalty for a first willful violation within 10 years, $5,000 for a second and $10,000 for each subsequent violation.
The case follows a separate 2025 lawsuit in which the ACLU accused LVMPD of withholding records connected to its cooperation with federal immigration enforcement, a separate records fight that Hoodline previously covered. This time, the argument is aimed squarely at the price of access — and at whether a public agency can make transparency so expensive that only well-funded requesters can afford it.
