Nevada enacted a red flag law in 2019 by AB 291, creating a process for an Extreme Risk Protection Order (ERPO) that can temporarily prohibit a person...
Reviewed by Will Luker, Founder of CCW Hub. USCCA Training Counselor, USCCA Certified Instructor, NRA Certified Instructor, Law Enforcement.
Nevada enacted a red flag law in 2019 by AB 291, creating a process for an Extreme Risk Protection Order (ERPO) that can temporarily prohibit a person from possessing firearms. The ERPO process is codified at NRS 33.500 through NRS 33.670 and involves both emergency (ex parte) orders lasting up to seven days and plenary orders lasting up to one year after a contested hearing.
A person subject to an ERPO must surrender all firearms in their possession to law enforcement and is prohibited from acquiring new firearms during the term of the order.
NRS 33.510 authorizes a Nevada district court to issue an Extreme Risk Protection Order against a person if there is clear and convincing evidence that the person:
"poses a substantial and imminent risk of causing personal injury to himself, herself, or another by having in his or her possession or having custody or control of, a firearm or by purchasing or otherwise acquiring a firearm."
Two types of orders are available:
NRS 33.520 limits petitioners to:
The statute does not authorize petitioning by:
Under NRS 33.530, an ex parte emergency ERPO petition includes:
The court reviews on an ex parte basis. If the standard is met by clear and convincing evidence, the court issues the emergency order. The court must schedule a hearing within 7 days of issuance of the emergency order, at which the respondent has the opportunity to be heard.
The emergency order does not require notice to the respondent before issuance; the respondent is notified when served.
Under NRS 33.540, the hearing must take place within 7 days of the emergency order (or within 21 days if no emergency order was issued). The respondent receives notice and may:
The standard at the hearing remains clear and convincing evidence. If the standard is met, the court issues a plenary ERPO for up to 1 year.
When an ERPO is in effect:
Service of the order is typically performed by the requesting law enforcement agency or by the sheriff of the respondent's county.
Under NRS 33.580, the respondent surrenders all firearms either:
The respondent must:
Failure to surrender within the time specified is a misdemeanor first offense, gross misdemeanor for subsequent.
A plenary ERPO may be renewed before expiration if the petitioner demonstrates that the underlying conditions persist. The renewal hearing follows the same procedure as the initial plenary hearing, with the same clear-and-convincing standard.
If the ERPO is not renewed and expires, the respondent's right to possess firearms is restored. The respondent may retrieve surrendered firearms from the storage agency.
Under NRS 33.600, when an ERPO expires, the respondent may petition for return of the surrendered firearms. The storing agency (law enforcement, FFL, or family member) returns the firearms after:
Federal NICS check on a returned firearm is not statutorily required, but most storing FFLs run a check before release to verify the recipient is not currently prohibited.
The respondent or the petitioner may move for dismissal of an ERPO. The court considers whether:
A dismissal restores the respondent's right to possess firearms.
Under NRS 33.640:
Additional federal exposure: 18 U.S.C. Section 922(g)(8) makes it a federal felony to possess a firearm while subject to a qualifying state-court protection order.
A person subject to an ERPO has their CFP automatically suspended during the term of the ERPO. The sheriff is notified of the order and updates the permit status. When the ERPO expires or is dismissed, the CFP holder may apply for reinstatement.
If the respondent's CFP eligibility has been revoked based on the underlying conduct that supported the ERPO (e.g., a domestic violence conviction or a mental health adjudication that creates a federal prohibitor), the CFP holder must reapply rather than seek reinstatement.
Under NRS 33.670, certain information in ERPO proceedings is confidential and not disclosed publicly. The petitioner's identity may be redacted from publicly available records; the substantive information about the respondent's risk profile is also confidential.
The order itself, however, is enforceable by law enforcement and may be disclosed to background-check systems (NICS).
Nevada's ERPO is a state-only mechanism. Federal law does not have a parallel "red flag" framework, but federal prohibitors (18 U.S.C. Section 922(g)) intersect with ERPO conduct:
The U.S. Supreme Court in United States v. Rahimi, 602 U.S. 680 (2024) upheld 18 U.S.C. Section 922(g)(8) against a Second Amendment challenge, confirming that the federal protection-order prohibitor is constitutional. State ERPO frameworks have not been the subject of a definitive U.S. Supreme Court ruling, but circuit court rulings have generally upheld them.
The 2025 Nevada Legislature considered minor procedural amendments (more streamlined surrender process; clarification of fee schedules) but did not enact substantive changes to the ERPO framework.
As of the most recent annual report from the Nevada Department of Public Safety (2024 data), approximately 250-400 ERPOs are issued in Nevada each year, with the majority being plenary orders after a hearing. The most common petitioners are law enforcement officers; family-and-household-member petitioners are less common but increasing.
See PERMIT_BASICS for CFP suspension during an ERPO, STORAGE for firearm storage during the order, and OTHER for the civil liability framework.
This page covers one part of our Nevada concealed carry guide.
Read the complete Nevada guideBrowse local instructors offering state-approved training in your area. Book online, complete your training, and get one step closer to your concealed carry permit.