Heather Schmidt advocates for criminalizing enablers in testimony for LB 156

The Judiciary Committee of the Nebraska Legislature convened on March 26, 2025, to discuss Legislative Bill 156 (LB 156), which aims to address the issue of enablers in criminal activities. The meeting featured testimonies from both proponents and opponents of the bill, highlighting differing perspectives on the proposed legislation.

The session began with a call for proponents of LB 156. Heather Schmidt, a key supporter, emphasized the importance of keeping children safe and the need for accountability among those who enable criminal behavior. She articulated that while it is crucial to protect taxpayers from unjust liability, there must be a legal mechanism to hold enablers accountable. Schmidt referenced the work of Amos Guerra from Quincy College of Law, who defines enablers as individuals who do not meet the criteria for conspiracy or accomplice liability due to a lack of intent. She proposed specific language for the bill that would criminalize enabling behavior, suggesting that an enabler is someone who knows another individual is likely to be harmed and fails to act to prevent that harm. Schmidt urged the committee to advance the bill for further legislative debate.

Following Schmidt's testimony, the committee opened the floor to opponents of the bill. Cameron Gunzel, representing the Nebraska Association of Trial Attorneys, expressed opposition, arguing that LB 156 does not go far enough in addressing the issue of enabling. Gunzel's testimony indicated a belief that the proposed legislation may be insufficient in its current form, although specific details of his concerns were not elaborated in the transcript.

The meeting concluded with a call for any additional proponents or opponents, but none were forthcoming. The committee's discussions highlighted the complexities surrounding the issue of enablers in criminal activities and set the stage for further deliberation on LB 156. The next steps will involve continued examination of the bill and potential revisions based on the feedback received during the meeting.