In August 2025, a federal judge blocked Clark County from requiring online platforms such as Airbnb to police and fine unlicensed listings of short-term rentals. Now, a year later, the Clark County Commission has passed a new ordinance on the subject that is not much different.
Short-term rentals (STRs) were outright banned in Clark County in 1998, long before the emergence of such online platforms. The ban was designed to benefit large resorts and hotel chains in the greater Las Vegas area by preventing competition from private homeowners. However, with a lack of enforcement and an enormous demand, many hosts were still opening their doors for interested tourists. In 2021, the Legislature passed Assembly Bill 363, which required the county to publish an ordinance that would replace the ban with a regulated market.
The county responded by creating two different types of permits — a short-term rental permit meant for homeowners and an accommodation facilitator permit designed for platforms advertising them.
In 2022, county officials passed the final version of an ordinance that made the homeowner’s permit nearly impossible to obtain. For example, homeowners were prohibited from offering their home as an STR if it was within 2,500 feet of a resort hotel or within 1,000 feet of another STR. They would also be subject to inspections without notice, be at the risk of receiving misdemeanour citations for misplacing trash or parking on the streets, and more. Of course, this was enforced by a long list of fines that could easily pile up. The situation was made even less navigable as the county opened its application process for a brief amount of time and provided licenses at a painfully slow speed. As of May, there were more than 13,000 Airbnb listings in Clark County, but only 220 active permits.
Hence, a group of homeowners joined by Airbnb challenged in federal court the constitutionality of the system designed by Clark County. In August 2025, Judge Miranda Du issued a preliminary injunction blocking the county from enforcing the heavy regulations on platforms such as Airbnb. In December of the same year, the court issued a second preliminary injunction, finding that the licensure process along with escalation in enforcement violates the 14th Amendment rights of Nevadan homeowners, and subsequently prevented county officials from enforcing the ordinance.
Now, the commission is gearing up to pass a new version of the ordinance and not much has changed. Instead of requiring platforms such as Airbnb to police listings to ensure that they comply with licensure standards, the new version aims to prevent payment processing for those listings. This means homes can be listed on digital platforms, but the checkout button to complete the transaction will disappear.
Importantly, to get or renew the accommodation facilitator permit (which will cost platforms up to $75,000), the platforms will need to police payments to private owners and abide by duties as outlined by the county. This is a key change following federal court injunctions, as Judge Du explained that Airbnb never had the chance to refuse Clark County’s ordinance: it was mandatory, not voluntary as in a contractual agreement. So county officials went back and added a “signature line,” to now ensure that the platforms are agreeing to police transactions of Nevadans.
The motivation behind this complex maze of licensure is plainly written in the proposed ordinance itself. STRs, it states, diverted a noticeable portion of economic activity from large resorts to small homeowners, which “negatively impacted the revenue derived from such rentals to local governments.” So when visitors are renting homes from private Nevadans instead of resorts, the county misses out on room tax revenue, a large share of which they committed to finance the construction of Allegiant Stadium to benefit a private sports franchise.
When the government sees the entrepreneurship of its residents as a problem to be solved, it is worth looking at those who benefit. Clark County and its private backers clearly want to rig the market for their own pecuniary interests. Meanwhile, the people on the other side of the issue are not lobbyists, but retirees trying to rent out homes, couples trying to make mortgage payments and cleaning ladies that get paid between guests.
After spending taxpayer money to defend its unconstitutional action against two federal court losses and one appeal, Clark County could do better than a mildly less intrusive ordinance. Nevadans need the freedom to rent their own property, not just better drafting.
Anahit Baghshetsyan is a policy analyst at Nevada policy, a Las Vegas think tank.
