Las Vegas tourism stakeholders are urging Nevada to reconsider long-standing barriers between the cannabis and casino industries, arguing that more flexible cannabis regulations could be key to revitalizing visitation and outpacing competitors.

Cannabis rules seen as a barrier to tourism:

During a panel at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas—hosted by the Cannabis Policy Institute and the International Gaming Institute—Seth Schorr, CEO of Fifth Street Gaming, joined cannabis entrepreneur David Goldwater and UNLV law professor and former Gaming Control Board member Terry Johnson to discuss the current regulatory divide.

“We need every tool in the toolbox,” Schorr emphasized, as reported by The Marijuana Herald. “Visitation is down. Maybe 10 years ago, you had to be conservative, but today it’s got to be on the table.”

Nevada law currently mandates a 1,500-foot distance between cannabis establishments and casinos, and Clark County regulations prohibit cannabis delivery to the Las Vegas Strip. A legislative effort to enable deliveries to non-gaming Strip properties was abandoned earlier this year, largely due to concerns from casino operators about possible violations of federal banking laws tied to marijuana’s classification as a Schedule I substance.

Schorr believes these restrictions are increasingly outdated. “A large part of my career has been identifying niche opportunities and creating experiences for a subset of the population that wants or expects different things than the general population,” he said. “I have to assume a large population would like a casino-resort with all of the amenities and consumption lounges.”

Goldwater agreed, stressing that current limits only drive visitors to the black market. “Being able to deliver and serve the tourism corridor would significantly assist legal sales and compete with the black market,” he noted. He also argued that consumption lounges near resorts would boost sales and tax revenue.

A chance to lead if federal changes arrive:

Both speakers called on the state to be proactive, anticipating a potential federal shift in marijuana’s legal status. “The more we can plan for it, the faster we can act,” Goldwater said. “Nevada should be ready to lead.”

Schorr echoed this sentiment, highlighting the potential for innovation if cannabis and gaming were allowed to intersect. While acknowledging that not every casino would embrace the idea, he pointed to the possibility of pioneering operators, like Derek Stevens of Circa, creating standout cannabis lounge experiences that might inspire wider adoption.

“We can’t afford to miss any opportunity. We can’t rest on our laurels,” Schorr said, referencing new competition from other jurisdictions offering unique tourism experiences.

Johnson, meanwhile, maintained that earlier regulatory caution was justified. “There are worst-case scenarios of gaming licensees being prosecuted or gaming assets seized in forfeiture actions,” he said. While acknowledging some criticism, he defended regulators’ choice to keep the industries apart until now.

Goldwater noted that the current framework had, in some ways, opened doors for smaller players by keeping large casino operators on the sidelines. But he described tourists’ confusion over delivery restrictions as a missed opportunity to support legal businesses and protect consumer safety.

“People go on vacation and want to do the vices. We allow them to drink and gamble and when they take a vacation some want to smoke marijuana,” Schorr said. “Las Vegas is about creating an experience that’s better than the one you can have at home.”

Schorr concluded that the industry is just beginning to explore the full potential of cannabis-driven tourism. “We’re in the early innings of what cannabis policy looks like. I don’t believe we’ve scratched the surface in terms of what cannabis tourism can look like.”