Is defamation a crime in Nevada?

On paper, yes. NRS 200.510 makes criminal libel a gross misdemeanor, covering defamation of the living, the dead, and even publication of a living person's "natural defects." In practice it is essentially never charged: legal authorities consider it unconstitutional under U.S. Supreme Court precedent, but the Legislature has never repealed it.

Can you defame a dead person in Nevada?

Civilly, no — defamation claims die with the person, so relatives can't sue over a dead person's reputation. But Nevada's criminal libel statute, NRS 200.510, explicitly covers defamation "tending to blacken the memory of the dead." It's a gross misdemeanor on paper, though prosecutions are essentially unheard of and the statute is considered constitutionally unenforceable.

Is truth a defense to criminal libel in Nevada?

Only conditionally — and that's the constitutional problem. Under Nevada's statute, truth is a defense only if the material was "published for good motive and for justifiable ends." The U.S. Supreme Court's Garrison v. Louisiana decision rejected exactly this kind of condition, which is why the statute is considered unenforceable despite never being repealed.

ON THE BOOKS

In Nevada, You Can Be Jailed for Defaming a Dead Person

Statewide🤠 Relics on the BooksNRS 200.510

Nevada's 1911 criminal libel statute makes it a jailable offense to 'blacken the memory of the dead' — or even to publish a living person's true 'natural defects.' Constitutional scholars consider it unenforceable. The Legislature has never repealed it.

Most people know defamation as a civil matter — you sue, you don't get arrested. Nevada, however, still carries a criminal libel statute from the 1911 Crimes and Punishments Act, essentially unamended since 1967. NRS 200.510 defines libel as "a malicious defamation, expressed by printing, writing, signs, pictures or the like, tending to blacken the memory of the dead, or to impeach the honesty, integrity, virtue, or reputation, or to publish the natural defects of a living person or persons... and thereby to expose them to public hatred, contempt or ridicule." Conviction is a gross misdemeanor.

Two phrases make this statute genuinely strange. First, "blacken the memory of the dead": civil defamation law runs exactly the other way — you cannot sue over a dead person's reputation — yet Nevada's criminal code theoretically lets prosecutors jail you for it. Second, "publish the natural defects" of a living person: the statute can criminalize statements that are true. Truth is a defense only if the material was "published for good motive and for justifiable ends." A companion section, NRS 200.560, separately criminalizes threatening to publish a libel to extort money.

The catch is the Constitution. The Nevada Press Association's legal handbook notes the statute is considered unconstitutional under the standards of New York Times v. Sullivan and Garrison v. Louisiana — conditioning a truth defense on "good motive" is precisely what the Supreme Court struck down — and that prosecutions are essentially unheard of. But "unenforceable" and "repealed" are different things, and Nevada has chosen neither to charge under it nor to remove it. The zombie statute simply waits.

What the Law Actually Says

NRS 200.510

Read the official statute

Current Penalty

Gross misdemeanor — up to 364 days in jail and a $2,000 fine. In practice, prosecutions are essentially unheard of because the statute is considered constitutionally unenforceable.

Has Anyone Actually Been Cited?

The Nevada Press Association's legal handbook notes prosecutions are essentially unheard of and the statute is considered unconstitutional under New York Times v. Sullivan and Garrison v. Louisiana. It remains unrepealed.

The Attorney's Take

Thomas Boley, Las Vegas Criminal Defense Attorney

“Unconstitutional-but-unrepealed statutes aren't harmless curiosities. Until a court formally strikes a law down, it sits in the code where an aggressive prosecutor can charge it and force a defendant to spend months and thousands of dollars litigating the constitutional question. I'd rather the Legislature clean house. If you're ever charged under an archaic statute, don't assume it will collapse on its own — constitutional defenses have to be raised, briefed, and won.”

Frequently Asked Questions

Sources

Verified against the primary source: 2026-07-02