Home
News
LAS VEGAS - A new Nevada law aimed at keeping Social Security numbers confidential is creating confusion at state agencies including courts in the state's most populous county, officials said.
"It has become very unworkable, and we're trying to keep the courthouse doors open while we try to figure out a way to comply with this statute," Clark County District Attorney David Roger told the Las Vegas Review-Journal for a Monday report.
Confusion surrounding the new law has added to friction between Clark County Clerk Shirley Parraguirre and Chief Clark County District Judge Kathy Hardcastle.
Judges are due to take over Parraguirre's duties as court clerk on Tuesday, and Parraguirre has disagreed with Hardcastle in recent days over how to interpret the new law, which took effect Jan. 1.
The 2005 Legislature passed the measure as a way to prevent identity theft, prohibiting the inclusion of Social Security numbers "on any document that is recorded, filed or otherwise submitted to the governmental agency."
But police use the numbers to ensure they are arresting the right suspects, Roger said, adding that he hoped the 2007 Legislature would amend the law to exempt law enforcement agencies.
The statute requires government agencies to ensure the confidentiality of any documents with Social Security numbers, and gives governmental agencies until 2017 to remove or make confidential Social Security numbers on documents submitted before Jan. 1.
Parraguirre has been requiring a signed "affirmation" with each of the up to 5,000 documents filed every day in District Court, telling clerks whether the document contains Social Security numbers.
Clerks cannot be expected to read every record every day to find those numbers, she said.
However, Hardcastle issued an administrative order Jan. 4 requiring the court clerk to accept records, documents and other filings without a Social Security number affirmation. Hardcastle said Parraguirre overstepped her authority by refusing to accept documents, including court orders, without affirmations.
"It has become very unworkable, and we're trying to keep the courthouse doors open while we try to figure out a way to comply with this statute," Clark County District Attorney David Roger told the Las Vegas Review-Journal for a Monday report.
Confusion surrounding the new law has added to friction between Clark County Clerk Shirley Parraguirre and Chief Clark County District Judge Kathy Hardcastle.
Judges are due to take over Parraguirre's duties as court clerk on Tuesday, and Parraguirre has disagreed with Hardcastle in recent days over how to interpret the new law, which took effect Jan. 1.
The 2005 Legislature passed the measure as a way to prevent identity theft, prohibiting the inclusion of Social Security numbers "on any document that is recorded, filed or otherwise submitted to the governmental agency."
But police use the numbers to ensure they are arresting the right suspects, Roger said, adding that he hoped the 2007 Legislature would amend the law to exempt law enforcement agencies.
The statute requires government agencies to ensure the confidentiality of any documents with Social Security numbers, and gives governmental agencies until 2017 to remove or make confidential Social Security numbers on documents submitted before Jan. 1.
Parraguirre has been requiring a signed "affirmation" with each of the up to 5,000 documents filed every day in District Court, telling clerks whether the document contains Social Security numbers.
Clerks cannot be expected to read every record every day to find those numbers, she said.
However, Hardcastle issued an administrative order Jan. 4 requiring the court clerk to accept records, documents and other filings without a Social Security number affirmation. Hardcastle said Parraguirre overstepped her authority by refusing to accept documents, including court orders, without affirmations.
