Caroline Menjivar

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1979, which would apply medical privacy law to health chatbots and require a licensed person to stay in charge of clinical decisions. California's medical confidentiality law bars providers, plans and their contractors from selling or sharing medical information beyond what care requires, and already treats businesses offering mental health or reproductive health digital services as providers. The bill would add businesses offering a health care chatbot, meaning a generative artificial intelligence system with a conversational interface marketed as supporting health services that uses health information a consumer gives or that it infers. A health facility, clinic, physician's office or group practice would have to take reasonable steps to ensure a licensed professional keeps the ability to exercise independent judgment whenever care is informed by a clinical decision support system. No artificial intelligence tool could independently perform a clinical function the law requires a licensed person to perform, or direct or supervise unlicensed staff in performing one. Licensing boards could seek an injunction where a violation amounts to unlicensed practice. Systems handling documentation, scheduling, reminders and similar work that involves no professional judgment are excluded, and trainees may use these tools under supervision. The Senate passed it 30-9. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 26, 2026Supports AI Regulation

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to agree to the Assembly's changes to Senate Bill 53, the Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act. It applies to companies training the largest AI models, those built with more than 10 to the 26th power computing operations, and its heaviest duties fall on developers with over $500 million in yearly revenue. Those companies must publish a safety framework explaining how they handle catastrophic risk, and send the Office of Emergency Services summaries of their internal risk assessments. That office must run a channel for reporting serious safety incidents, open to companies and the public. Employees who report a serious danger to public safety are protected from retaliation, and large developers must offer an anonymous internal channel for such reports. Incident reports and risk assessments sent to that office are closed to public records requests. The Attorney General may seek penalties of up to $1 million per violation. The act also bars cities and counties from writing their own rules on catastrophic AI risk, and sets up a consortium to plan a public computing cluster if the Legislature funds it. The Senate agreed 29-8 and it became law.

September 13, 2025Supports AI Regulation

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 31, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 7, which would have set rules for employers using automated systems to manage, discipline and fire workers. An automated decision system means a computer process using machine learning, statistical modeling, data analytics or artificial intelligence that produces a score, classification or recommendation used in place of or alongside human judgment. There is no general state law today requiring private employers to disclose or limit these systems. An employer would have had to give written notice to affected workers at least 30 days before using one. That notice would have listed the decisions it touches, the worker data used and its sources, any settings known to skew results, who built it, any quota it sets, and the worker's right to see and correct their data. Job applicants would have had to be told that hiring uses such a system. An employer could not have used one to break employment or civil rights law, to infer a worker's protected characteristics, or to punish a worker for exercising legal rights. An employer could not have relied solely on such a system to discipline, fire or deactivate a worker, and could not have used customer ratings as the main input. Workers could have requested their own data once a year. Employers under a union contract that expressly waives these rules would have been exempt, and the penalty was $500. The Senate passed it 28-9, but the governor vetoed it, so it did not become law.

September 12, 2025Supports AI Regulation

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to agree to the Assembly's changes to Senate Bill 524, which makes every police agency set rules for official reports written with artificial intelligence. Such a report must say that a computer helped write it and carry the signature of the officer who prepared it, and the first computer-written draft must be kept as long as the report. That draft does not count as the officer's own statement, and the agency must keep a log of who used the tool and what video or audio it worked from. The companies supplying these tools may not share, sell, or otherwise use police information except for that agency's work or under a court order, though they may look at it to fix faults, reduce bias, and improve accuracy. The California State Senate agreed 28-10, sending the bill to the governor, and it became law.

September 10, 2025Supports AI Regulation

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 29, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1979, which would apply medical privacy law to health chatbots and require a licensed person to stay in charge of clinical decisions. California's medical confidentiality law bars providers, plans and their contractors from selling or sharing medical information beyond what care requires, and already treats businesses offering mental health or reproductive health digital services as providers. The bill would add businesses offering a health care chatbot, meaning a generative artificial intelligence system with a conversational interface marketed as supporting health services that uses health information a consumer gives or that it infers. A health facility, clinic, physician's office or group practice would have to take reasonable steps to ensure a licensed professional keeps the ability to exercise independent judgment whenever care is informed by a clinical decision support system. No artificial intelligence tool could independently perform a clinical function the law requires a licensed person to perform, or direct or supervise unlicensed staff in performing one. Licensing boards could seek an injunction where a violation amounts to unlicensed practice. Systems handling documentation, scheduling, reminders and similar work that involves no professional judgment are excluded, and trainees may use these tools under supervision. The Senate passed it 30-9. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 26, 2026Supports Healthcare Affordability

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 1037, which would move the judgment on unreasonable health insurance rate increases from federal to state officials. An unreasonable rate increase now means one the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services finds excessive, unjustified or unfairly discriminatory. The bill would instead let the Director of the Department of Managed Health Care or the Insurance Commissioner make that finding, and would add increases that are otherwise unreasonable. When filing rates, a plan or insurer would have to show whether its annual rate growth exceeds the state's health care cost target. If growth is expected to exceed the target, the filing would have to list the steps the company is taking or plans to take to get back within it. The bill would delete the current instruction that regulators weigh the effect of those cost targets when judging a single rate. In its place the departments would report each year on whether rates meet an affordability standard for an individual, a couple and a family of four, with five years of premium and cost-sharing changes. The Senate passed it 30-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 25, 2026Supports Healthcare Affordability

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 2011, which would lock California's mental health insurance parity standard to the federal rules as they stood at the start of 2025. Federal parity law says limits on mental health and addiction benefits cannot be tougher than those on medical and surgical benefits, and California requires plans and policies to comply with it. A non-numeric limit, such as prior authorization or a narrow provider network, is called a nonquantitative treatment limitation. The bill would require individual, small group and large group contracts and policies to comply with the specified federal rules, regulations and guidance as they existed on January 1, 2025. That would keep a later federal loosening from flowing through into California coverage. The Department of Managed Health Care and the Department of Insurance would have to review provisions that conflict with or materially differ from federal regulations and jointly issue compliance guidance. The Senate passed it 28-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 20, 2026Supports Healthcare Affordability

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to agree to the Assembly's changes to Senate Bill 596, which tightens the fines hospitals face for breaking nurse-to-patient staffing limits. A hospital escapes a fine if it has used up its on-call list of nurses, and the law now spells out what that list is. Calling nurses who were not scheduled on call, and who are not in the backup pool for that ward and shift, does not count as using it up. The health department must also treat a breach on each separate day as its own violation. The California State Senate agreed 21-10, sending the bill to the governor, and it became law.

September 12, 2025Supports Healthcare Affordability

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 29, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 418, which would have required health plans to cover a year's supply of hormone therapy at once and banned discrimination by insurers. Plans set their own limits today on how much of a prescription they will cover in one go. The bill would have required a plan or policy with outpatient drug benefits to cover up to a 12-month supply of approved prescription hormone therapy, dispensed at one time, when a network provider prescribes it. Plans could not have used approval rules or other management to cut that supply below 12 months, though they could still have limited refills in the final quarter of a year in which a full supply had already been dispensed. Medi-Cal would have covered the therapy, but Medi-Cal managed care plans, which cover most enrollees, were excluded. Pharmacists would have had to dispense up to a year's supply, subject to an exception. Separately the bill would have barred any plan or insurer from denying enrollment, benefits or coverage, or adding cost sharing, because of race, color, national origin, age, disability or sex, with sex including intersex traits, pregnancy and gender identity. The hormone supply rules would have expired at the start of 2035; the nondiscrimination rules had no end date. The Senate passed it 29-10, but the governor vetoed it, so it did not become law.

September 11, 2025Supports Healthcare Affordability

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 499, which widens state help with large medical bills for one farm worker health plan. The Robert F. Kennedy Farm Workers Medical Plan is a non-profit association that pays health benefits for farm workers and their families. Through 2030 the state must reimburse that plan up to $3 million a year for claim payments above $70,000 for a single member or dependent in one episode of care. The bill lowers that threshold to $50,000, so more claims qualify for state help. The $3 million yearly cap does not change, so the same money is spread across more claims rather than more money being added. The bill applies to that one named plan and to no other. The Senate passed it 29-10 and it became law.

September 8, 2025Supports Healthcare Affordability

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1312, which requires hospitals, from July 1, 2027, to check whether a patient qualifies for free or discounted care instead of waiting for the patient to apply. A patient enrolled in CalFresh or CalWORKs is presumed to qualify, and a hospital must run the check for patients who are uninsured or meet other listed conditions. A hospital may not make a patient apply for Medicare, Medi-Cal, or other coverage before it screens them. It passed the California State Senate 27-8 and became law.

September 8, 2025Supports Healthcare Affordability

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 30, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1415, which extends the state's health care cost watchdog to cover the management companies that run medical practices behind the scenes. It writes hedge funds and similar investor owners into the law by name. Those management companies must report data to the office, and must give it written notice of mergers and other deals involving them or the companies that own them. It passed the California State Senate 26-10 and became law.

September 4, 2025Supports Healthcare Affordability

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 27, 2026

Authored Senate Bill 729, signed in 2024 as Chapter 930 of the statutes. Large-group health plans must cover diagnosis and treatment of infertility, including in vitro fertilization. The law ended the exclusion of LGBTQ+ and unpartnered people from fertility coverage.

September 29, 2024Supports Healthcare Affordability

Source: leginfo.legislature.ca.gov · researched July 17, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 2619, which would require data centers to disclose their water use when they seek a business license. Cities and counties license businesses, and nothing now requires a data center to say how much water it expects to use. Before applying for its first license or permit, the owner or operator would have to give its water supplier three figures under penalty of perjury. Those are a good faith estimate of expected water use, the anticipated source, and projected volume for the maximum day, the maximum month and an average year. The same three facts would go on the initial license application itself, again under penalty of perjury. On renewal the operator would report the previous calendar year's annual water use, including total and direct use. Urban water suppliers would have to include the unconstrained demand of data centers, irrigation and other large users when estimating current year demand in their water plans. The rules would be a matter of statewide concern, so they would reach charter cities. The bill requires disclosure only. It sets no limit on how much water a data center may use. The Senate passed it 30-9. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 26, 2026Supports Environment and Public Health

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 633, which would raise the penalty on drink makers that miss California's recycled-plastic targets and require independent proof of what they use. Plastic bottles sold under the deposit program must contain a minimum share of recycled plastic, now 25 percent and rising to 50 percent in 2030. A bottler that falls short pays 20 cents for each pound of new plastic used in place of recycled, and the bill would raise that to 30 cents. From March 1, 2028 a bottler would also have to give the state proof that its recycled content has been validated by an approved third party, and a supplier of recycled plastic that provides such a validation would have to ensure it is accurate. A bottler that unknowingly passes on an inaccurate validation from its supplier would not be liable. The state would have to publish a yearly list of bottlers and their brands showing whether each has complied. The bill does not change the recycled-content targets themselves or the deposit system. The Senate passed it 28-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 26, 2026Supports Environment and Public Health

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1457, which would require cities and counties to involve poor and pollution-burdened neighborhoods in their environmental justice planning. A city or county containing such a community must already include an environmental justice section in its general plan, but the law does not say how residents must be brought in. The bill would require at least two public workshops at accessible times, offered both in person and online. It would also require at least two other ways of involving residents and two ways of notifying them. Drafts would have to be posted on a public website, along with information about workshops and hearings translated into the three most commonly spoken local languages. A first draft would have to appear at least 90 days before adoption, with 45 days for comment and a revised draft 15 days ahead. The city would have to summarize the comments, give them to every member of the governing body, and publish the summary in the adopted plan. It would also set a deadline of June 30, 2031 for places that never revise two plan sections at once. The Senate passed it 29-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 26, 2026Supports Environment and Public Health

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1448, which would tighten the rules on oil and gas drilling in California's coastal waters. The State Lands Commission may now lease state tidelands for oil or gas when a neighboring federal well is draining the deposit and the lease serves the state's interest. The bill would bar those leases inside state marine protected areas and federal national marine sanctuaries. It would move a cutoff date from 2018 to 2026, and would newly bar using existing pipelines and facilities to serve federal offshore leases issued after that date. Before renewing or changing a lease the commission would have to weigh seven added factors. Those include any past spill, whether the change moves more oil through state waters, and whether the operator has filed spill-response and decommissioning guarantees. Before approving a sale to another company it would have to examine the buyer's finances, safety record and history of breaking other laws. A company selling a lease would stay responsible for plugging wells and cleaning the site, unless the commission found those duties met or accepted security worth the estimated cost plus twenty percent. The Senate passed it 29-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 26, 2026Supports Environment and Public Health

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 501, which would widen California's battery recycling program to cover far more batteries. Producers must already fund collection and recycling of covered batteries, meaning loose batteries a user can remove with common household tools. An anti-theft lock or key supplied by the producer would no longer keep a battery outside that definition, so long as it exists to prevent theft rather than to stop the consumer removing or recycling the battery. The bill would delete the exclusions for non-rechargeable batteries over two kilograms and rechargeable batteries over five kilograms with more than 300 watt hours. Covered batteries would be sorted into small and medium formats, with separate minimum collection site counts for each, based on county population. Operators would have to meet minimum recycling efficiency rates of 60 percent for rechargeable and 70 percent for other batteries. Audits would follow national accounting standards, records would be kept five years instead of three, and inspectors could enter collection sites and investigate producers, retailers and recyclers. The Senate passed it 30-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 25, 2026Supports Environment and Public Health

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 40, which would force a full environmental study before a large coal terminal can be approved. Under the California Environmental Quality Act an agency decides case by case whether a project needs a full environmental impact report or a shorter document. The bill would remove that choice for a large-volume bulk coal facility, meaning a site designed to handle, store or export more than five million short tons of coal a year. An air district permit allowing such a facility to be built, or raising its potential emissions, could no longer be treated as automatic and outside the act. An agency could not rely on an older report if the type of coal changed or was never addressed, if the quantity rose sharply or was never disclosed, or if capacity crossed the five-million-ton line. A report that never analyzed coal handling, storage and transport would carry no informational value, and the facility would be treated as a new project. The report would have to identify the coal types and volume and analyze fine and coarse airborne dust during construction and operation, with measures enough to prevent a significant rise in dust beyond the site boundary. The rules would reach approvals pending or made between June 4, 2026 and January 1, 2027. The Senate passed it 30-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 25, 2026Supports Environment and Public Health

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 762, which would ban disposable tobacco vapes in California. From January 1, 2027 no one could import or manufacture for sale in the state a new or refurbished disposable, battery-embedded vapor device. From January 1, 2028 no one could sell, distribute or offer one for sale. The ban covers a vaporizing device holding a tobacco product that is not designed to be reused, meaning it cannot be refilled or recharged. Cannabis vapes, refillable devices and federally regulated medical devices would not be covered. Civil penalties would run $500 for a first violation, $1,000 for a second and $2,000 after that, and a violation would also be an infraction carrying up to $500. Cities, counties and the state could all enforce it. From 2028 such devices containing tobacco could also be seized and forfeited under the tobacco licensing law, with a $50 penalty for each package, a license suspension on a second seizure and revocation on a third. The Senate passed it 30-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 25, 2026Supports Environment and Public Health

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1661, which would send oil-well penalty money directly to households near the Inglewood oil field. Penalties collected from low-producing wells there already flow into an account used for community projects. The bill would require the first $5 million, after administration costs, to go to Los Angeles County to pay equal one-time cash grants to qualifying households. A household would qualify if it sits within two and a half miles of the identified wells, asks for help, has a member with respiratory or reproductive health effects, and proves it lives there. The county could accept a person's own statement about the health effect. No more than 1,000 households could be paid, chosen by random lottery if more qualify, and paid within 60 days of selection. The money would not count as income when the state or county decides eligibility for other benefits. Community projects would have to wait until these payments are made. The Senate passed it 30-9. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 25, 2026Supports Environment and Public Health

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1820, which would cap what a city may charge to permit an electric vehicle charger at an apartment building. Local permit fees must already stay at or below the reasonable cost of providing the service, but there is no dollar limit for charger permits. For a level 2 charger installed at a new or existing multifamily housing development, the fee could not exceed $500, plus $5 for each kilowatt between 51 and 250, plus $2 for every kilowatt above 250. A city could still charge more if it adopts a written finding and a resolution or ordinance with substantial evidence of the reasonable cost. That finding would have to state that the city has adopted streamlining measures consistent with state guidance, calculate the administrative cost of issuing the permit, and describe how the higher fee produces a quicker approval. The cap would start July 1, 2027, or January 1, 2028 for places with fewer than 200,000 residents, and would expire in 2036. It reaches only level 2 chargers at multifamily housing, not chargers generally. The Senate passed it 27-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 20, 2026Supports Environment and Public Health

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1944, which would let zero-emission transit buses carry more weight on each axle for several years. A bus axle generally may not carry more than 20,500 pounds, and transit buses bought under later solicitations are held to a 22,000-pound curb weight. Batteries and hydrogen equipment make zero-emission buses heavier than diesel ones. For solicitations issued in 2027 the limit for a zero-emission transit bus would be 25,000 pounds, falling to 24,000 for 2028 and 2029, then 23,000 for 2030 and 2031, and back to 22,000 from 2032. The extra allowance would not apply to articulated buses that are not zero-emission. Federal weight limits on interstate highways would still override, and the existing rule requiring four wheels to support any axle above 20,000 pounds would remain. The Senate passed it 31-8. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 18, 2026Supports Environment and Public Health

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Introduced a bill creating a statewide Water Rate Assistance Program that would give low-income households a credit of at least $20 a month on their water bills, paid from a new state fund (Senate Bill 1125). It passed both houses in August 2026.

February 17, 2026Supports Environment and Public Health

Source: leginfo.legislature.ca.gov · researched August 21, 2026

California Senate Bill 68, authored by Senator Caroline Menjivar, was approved by the Governor and filed as Chapter 741, establishing requirements concerning major food allergens in the California Retail Food Code.

October 13, 2025Supports Environment and Public Health

Source: leginfo.legislature.ca.gov · researched August 21, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 787, which would have built state machinery to coordinate clean energy manufacturing. No state office currently coordinates agency work on clean energy supply chains. By March 1, 2027 the Energy Commission would have appointed a Senior Counselor on Industrial Policy and Clean Energy Development. That person would have collected and published data on offshore wind, batteries and building decarbonization, covering costs, prices, deployment rates and workforce needs. They would have coordinated firms, industry bodies and unions, and acted with other agencies as a single point of contact for companies siting plants here. They would also have held at least two public meetings a year and convened working groups on home, vehicle and grid batteries, recycling, offshore wind and building decarbonization. Those groups would have considered options including state stockpiles, central procurement, public equity investment through pension funds, and price management. Six agencies would have signed a memorandum of understanding by the same date, and the counselor would have published an annual report. The bill created planning and coordination duties. It bought nothing and spent nothing, and the fund it created was left empty. The Senate passed it 29-8, but the governor vetoed it, so it did not become law.

September 13, 2025Supports Environment and Public Health

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 541, which would have required the state to measure and publish how much each electric utility shifts power use away from peak hours. Load shifting means moving electricity use to a different time of day so less generating and grid capacity is needed at the busiest times. The Energy Commission already publishes a report every two years and sets a statewide load-shifting goal. In its first report after January 1, 2027 the commission would have had to analyze how cost-effective particular load-shifting programs and methods are, and roughly how much each delivers and costs. Every report would have had to estimate each retail supplier's load-shifting potential, weighing its service territory, cost-effectiveness and share of statewide demand. From July 1, 2028 and every two years after, the commission would have had to publish how much each supplier actually achieved the previous year. Suppliers with 60,000 or fewer accounts, or under 1,000 gigawatt-hours of yearly demand, were excluded. The bill set no target any utility had to meet and carried no penalty. The Senate passed it 29-8, but the governor vetoed it, so it did not become law.

September 13, 2025Supports Environment and Public Health

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to agree to the Assembly's changes to Senate Bill 655, which declares it the policy of California that every home must be able to reach and hold a safe maximum indoor temperature. State agencies must weigh that policy when they set or revise programs, criteria and grant rules, and from January 1, 2027, when they write regulations. The bill sets the goal and directs agencies toward it; it does not by itself impose a cooling standard on any building. The Senate agreed 31-8 and it became law.

September 11, 2025Supports Environment and Public Health

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 31, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1056, which limits who can inherit a commercial gill net or trammel net permit. California stopped issuing new ones long ago, so these permits change hands only by transfer. The law removes the rule that let a permit pass to another qualified fisher when the holder died or became disabled. From January 1, 2027 a long-standing holder may pass a permit only to a family member, and once it moves that way it cannot be passed on again. It passed the California State Senate 29-10 and became law.

September 11, 2025Supports Environment and Public Health

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 29, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 93, which would have required data centers to disclose how much water they use. Cities and counties license businesses and set license fees, and nothing now requires a data center to report its water use. Before applying for a first business license or permit, the owner or operator would have had to give the water supplier an estimate of expected water use, sworn under penalty of perjury. On the first application they would have had to certify, again under penalty of perjury, that the estimate was given. On every renewal they would have had to certify that they had given the supplier a report of annual water use. The Department of Water Resources would have been allowed, though not required, to sort data centers into tiers based on what drives their water use and set standards for each tier. The rules were declared a matter of statewide concern, so they would have reached charter cities too. The bill set no limit on how much water a data center may use. The Senate passed it 30-10, but the governor vetoed it, so it did not become law.

September 10, 2025Supports Environment and Public Health

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to agree to the Assembly's changes to Senate Bill 30, which stops a public agency from selling, donating, or handing on diesel rail equipment for further use once the agency retires it. An agency may pass it on only if it approves the deal at a public meeting and the equipment qualifies. Equipment qualifies if it meets one of the cleaner federal engine grades, pollutes no more than equipment in those grades, or has had its diesel engine taken out. The California State Senate agreed 29-10, sending the bill to the governor, and it became law.

September 10, 2025Supports Environment and Public Health

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 29, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1319, which makes it illegal in California to bring in, send out, carry, sell, buy, or hold for sale any fish, wildlife, or plant taken in breach of a state or federal wildlife law. It measures those laws as they stood on January 19, 2025, so later cuts to federal protection do not narrow it, and anything seized is forfeited on conviction. When the federal government weakens protection for a species, the Department of Fish and Wildlife must add it to a temporary candidate list, but only if the department finds the change will substantially harm that species in California and that listing would meaningfully reduce the harm. The rules stop working at the end of 2031, and a business is not liable while it follows a federal permit that allows some harm to a protected species. It passed the California State Senate 25-10 and became law.

September 10, 2025Supports Environment and Public Health

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 27, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 39, which requires larger cities and counties to write a local plan for electrification and clean energy. Every city and county must adopt a general plan with required sections, and none of them covers electrification today. Between January 1, 2027 and January 1, 2030 a city or county with more than 75,000 residents must adopt an electrification, decarbonization or community energy plan, or fold one into its next general plan update. The plan must set local goals and workable measures on six subjects. The first three are expanding electric vehicle charging and removing barriers to it, charging in parking lots and structures and on public streets, and electrifying new and existing buildings including help for low-income households. The rest are rooftop and community solar with microgrids and storage, infrastructure for zero-emission truck fleets, and, with the local utilities, where grid upgrades are needed. It must also address the needs of disadvantaged communities, low-income households and small businesses. A place with a qualifying plan already may designate it instead. The duty is to write a plan. The bill requires no charger, panel or wire to be built, and it may not impose building code requirements. The Senate passed it 30-10 and it became law.

September 9, 2025Supports Environment and Public Health

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1336, which would have made it easier for farmworkers to win compensation for heat illness. Workers' compensation already assumes that certain injuries to police officers and firefighters are job-related, leaving the employer to disprove it. The bill would have created that same assumption, through 2030, for heat-related illness, injury or death suffered by an outdoor farmworker whose employer broke the state's heat illness prevention rules. An employer could still rebut it with evidence, but if they did not the appeals board would have had to rule for the worker. A covered claim would have included hospital, surgical and medical treatment, disability payments and death benefits. One provision ran the other way for workers. A finding made in the compensation case could not be used against the employer before the state workplace safety appeals board. The bill would also have moved $5 million from an existing employer-funded account to run the program. The Senate passed it 30-10, but the governor vetoed it, so it did not become law.

September 9, 2025Supports Environment and Public Health

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 727, which requires public schools teaching grades 7 through 12, and public colleges, to print an LGBTQ+ suicide crisis line on the student identification cards they issue. Both the phone number and the text line must appear, starting July 1, 2026, alongside the 988 crisis line those cards already carry. It passed the California State Senate 30-10 and became law.

September 9, 2025Supports Environment and Public Health

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 30, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1037, which widens access to overdose-reversal drugs such as naloxone. Standing prescriptions and the right to carry one now cover any overdose, not only an opioid overdose, and anyone in a position to help a person at risk may hold one and pass it on. It drops the rule that a person be trained before receiving or carrying one. Someone who gives the drug in good faith, and is not paid for it, is generally not liable for civil damages, trained or not, unless they were grossly negligent or acted wilfully. The law also stops the state from making sobriety a condition of admission or continued treatment in licensed addiction treatment facilities that offer basic medical care on site. It repeals the rule that drug and alcohol programs receiving state money must carry a message that there is no lawful use of drugs. It passed the California State Senate 30-10 and became law.

September 9, 2025Supports Environment and Public Health

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 29, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 399, which would have let the Coastal Commission approve wetland restoration projects to measure how much carbon they store. Anyone developing in the coastal zone needs a coastal development permit, and there is no such program today. The bill would have allowed the commission to authorize blue carbon demonstration projects, meaning the restoration of coastal wetland, subtidal, intertidal or marine habitat that can absorb and hold carbon. Projects would have been limited to places where the habitat once existed and has since been degraded, restored toward its historical state, using diverse native species. The commission could have required a non-residential project that damages such habitat to build or fund one of these projects as compensation. Each project would have had to be designed and monitored so the carbon uptake could be shown, including how permanent the storage is, with results presented at a public hearing. The commission would have consulted other state agencies and sought advice from federal ones. None of it would have operated until the Legislature appropriated money for it. The Senate passed it 29-10, but the governor vetoed it, so it did not become law.

September 4, 2025Supports Environment and Public Health

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 734, which would have made wildlife survey data in power plant applications public. The Energy Commission certifies sites for power lines and thermal power plants, and nothing required biological survey data filed with those applications to be posted publicly. The bill would have required biological resources data filed with an application for certification or a small power plant exemption to be posted on the commission's public docket. That data includes species and habitat information and maps at a scale of one inch to 500 feet. The Department of Fish and Wildlife could have withheld location data by written determination that disclosure would pose a significant risk to individuals of the species. In doing so it would have had to assess the maximum amount of data that could be released without posing that risk. The same posting rule would have applied to applications for large solar and land-based wind facilities under the separate track that runs to mid-2029. The Senate passed it 31-9, but the governor vetoed it, so it did not become law.

September 3, 2025Supports Environment and Public Health

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 43, which keeps California's backstop for rivers that lose federal wild and scenic protection. If Congress removes a California river from the national wild and scenic rivers system, or the federal government exempts it from water project restrictions, the state Natural Resources Secretary must hold a public hearing. The Secretary then decides whether adding the river to the state system is in the state's best interest, and if so adds and classifies it as wild, scenic or recreational. That power, and any designation made under it, were both due to expire at the end of 2025. The bill removes both expiry dates, so the power continues and a designation stays in effect until a statute removes or changes it. State protection may not exceed the length or scope of the former federal designation, and the Legislature may still remove or reclassify one. The Senate passed it 30-10 and it became law.

September 3, 2025Supports Environment and Public Health

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 454, which makes it unlawful, with no end date, to kill, capture, or possess migratory birds protected by the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act. It fixes the list to the birds protected under that federal law before January 1, 2025, plus any added later, so a federal rollback does not narrow California's protection. Federal rules allowing certain takings still apply, unless they conflict with California's own fish and game law. The state protection it replaces had been written to lapse. It passed the California State Senate 30-10 and became law.

September 3, 2025Supports Environment and Public Health

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 30, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 309, which makes permanent a rule that had been set to expire at the end of 2025, letting pharmacists and doctors supply clean needles and syringes to adults without a prescription. Adults 18 and over may obtain them for their own use, and a pharmacy that sells them must still provide written information or counseling. It passed the California State Senate 28-11 and became law.

September 3, 2025Supports Environment and Public Health

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 30, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 2599, which would require large long-established companies to search their records for historical ties to slavery. A separate existing law already makes big retailers and manufacturers disclose efforts against forced labor in their present-day supply chains. This bill looks backwards instead. A business operating in California that existed, or whose predecessor existed, on or before December 31, 1964, and takes in more than $100 million worldwide, would have to file a sworn affidavit. The affidavit would verify that the company searched all records held by it and its related entities for evidence of five things. Those are buying or selling enslaved people, using them as collateral, lending money to buy them, insuring such transactions or the people themselves, and providing services that facilitated them. The Civil Rights Department would build a public online platform hosting the affidavits and records within a year of being funded. A covered business bidding on a state contract worth $100,000 or more would also have to certify under penalty of perjury that it filed the affidavit. None of it applies unless the Legislature appropriates money for it. The Senate passed it 30-9. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 25, 2026Supports Reduce Wealth Gap

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 2646, which would set a $19.75 hourly minimum wage for a narrow group of farm workers. Farm workers are currently paid the general state minimum wage. The bill would apply the higher floor to approved agricultural employees, meaning workers living outside California who are allowed to work here temporarily or seasonally through an application the state has approved. It would also cover corresponding employees, meaning California residents doing the same or substantially similar farm work at the same time, for the same employer, in the same county. An employer who uses no approved out-of-state workers would owe nothing extra, so most California farm workers would be unaffected. From January 1, 2027 the rate would rise each year by the same cost-of-living percentage the Social Security Administration applies to benefits, which means no increase in a year with no adjustment. The Senate passed it 30-9. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 25, 2026Supports Reduce Wealth Gap

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 2186, which would exempt reparations payments from state income tax. California taxes income from any source unless the law specifically excludes it. For tax years from 2028 through 2032, the bill would exclude any reparations benefit or payment a taxpayer receives. That would cover money, grants, trust distributions, debt forgiveness or other compensation provided under a state law, a local ordinance or settlement, or a federal reparations program. A reparations program means a government program compensating people for historical harms, discrimination or unequal treatment. The exclusion would be repealed at the end of 2033. The bill also states the goals and reporting measures that state law requires whenever a new tax break is created. The Senate passed it 28-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 19, 2026Supports Reduce Wealth Gap

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 437, which puts up to $6 million for the California State University to research reparations and how to verify who descends from an enslaved person. A state task force studied reparations for African Americans until 2023 and made recommendations, but no body was funded to carry the research forward. The bill appropriates the money for the university to do that research, alone or with other universities or nonprofits, and lets it pay for students to take part. Before each fiscal year the university must consult the California Legislative Black Caucus on which topics to fund. It must explore how to confirm a person's status as a descendant of an enslaved person, and must build a process for doing or checking that genealogical research for use in reparative claims. That work must begin by the 2026-27 academic year and the process must be finished by the 2029-30 academic year. The university must report each October until the money runs out, and the final report must give findings, options and the timeline and cost of running the process statewide. The bill pays no claim and decides no one's eligibility. The Senate passed it 30-10 and it became law.

September 9, 2025Supports Reduce Wealth Gap

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 57, which would have reserved part of a state down-payment fund for descendants of enslaved people. The California Dream for All program makes shared appreciation loans to first-time homebuyers, meaning the state helps with the down payment and later takes a share of the home's rise in value. The money sits in a fund that is paid out without a fresh vote each year. The bill would have reserved at least 10 percent of that fund for applicants who qualify for a loan on the normal terms and are certified as descendants of formerly enslaved people. The certification would have come from a Bureau for Descendants of American Slavery, which does not yet exist. The bill would have taken effect only if a separate bill creating that bureau became law by January 1, 2027, and the reservation would have begun only once the bureau set up a certification process. Because the fund is a fixed pot, reserving a share for one group leaves less for other first-time buyers. The Senate passed it 28-9, but the governor vetoed it, so it did not become law.

September 8, 2025Supports Reduce Wealth Gap

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 2227, which would raise the bonds and penalties that apply to farm labor contractors. These contractors hire and supply farmworkers to growers and must be licensed by the Labor Commissioner. A penalty of $100 for each worker plus $100 for each day, capped at $10,000, now applies to operating without a license. The bill would extend it to licensed contractors and to violations across the whole chapter unless another penalty applies. A contractor must post a surety bond, a guarantee that pays workers if the contractor does not. The bond is now set by the size of the annual payroll, at $25,000, $50,000 or $75,000. The bill would set it by annual gross receipts instead and double the amounts to $50,000, $100,000 and $150,000. Because gross receipts are usually larger than payroll, more contractors would fall into the higher brackets. The Labor Commissioner would have to collect documentation of that figure, and would have to publish bond details on the public license database, including the bond number, dates, size and the surety company's contact information. A contractor would also have to tell a worker filing a claim that the bond exists and how to reach it. The Senate passed it 28-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 27, 2026Supports Labor Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 909, which would raise the penalties for underpaying workers on public construction. Contractors on public works must pay the prevailing wage, and the penalties have not changed since 2012. The maximum penalty for underpaying would rise from $200 to $280 for each worker for each day. The minimums would rise from $40, $80 and $120 to $56, $112 and $168, the higher figures applying to a contractor with a violation in the past three years and to a willful violation. The penalty for failing to produce payroll records within ten days would rise from $100 to $140 for each worker for each day. Apprenticeship penalties would rise from $100 to $140 a day, and from $300 to $420 for a repeat violation. The ceiling on contractor registration fees would rise from $800 to $1,000. Penalty money would go into the state enforcement fund, which could pay for staffing the Labor Commissioner's public works enforcement. The existing power to reduce a penalty for a promptly corrected good faith mistake, or where it would be disproportionate, is unchanged. The Senate passed it 30-9. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 26, 2026Supports Labor Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1838, which would require contractors bidding on local public works to disclose their wage and hour violations. There is no general disclosure requirement today outside contracts with participation goals for minority, women or disabled veteran businesses. As a condition of bidding, a contractor would have to disclose in writing any federal, state or local wage and hour violation in the past five years, including unpaid wages, overtime, meal or rest break violations, and misclassifying employees as contractors. It would also have to supply documents showing each disclosed violation has been resolved, including court orders or final agency determinations and proof that fines, penalties or back wages were paid. Failing to disclose may lead to disqualification, and the local agency must set up a process letting a contractor appeal that. Only a final judgment or determination counts, and a contractor cannot be disqualified over a matter still under appeal if the amount is secured. Work covered by a project labor agreement is exempt, as is a project where the agency already requires the same disclosure at prequalification. The bill does not say that a disclosed violation is itself grounds to reject a bid. The Senate passed it 31-9. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 26, 2026Supports Labor Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 1237, which would raise the penalty on employers that repeatedly fail to file a pay data report. Larger private employers must file a yearly report with the Civil Rights Department showing employee counts by race, ethnicity and sex, and within each job category the median and mean hourly pay for each group. A court must already impose up to $100 per employee for failing to file and up to $200 per employee for a later failure. The bill would raise that repeat penalty to up to $1,000 per employee, leaving the first-time penalty unchanged. It would also require the department to publish each year the total number of pay data reports it received. That count would still be subject to the existing rule that published figures be arranged so they cannot be traced to any individual business or person. The Senate passed it 30-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 26, 2026Supports Labor Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 2495, which would widen the ban on using someone's immigration status against them at work. Employers may not now engage in, or direct someone else to engage in, an unfair immigration-related practice to retaliate against a worker for exercising a right under state labor law or a local ordinance. The bill would extend that to any right under a local, state or federal law or regulation applying to employees. It would also bar preventing a person from exercising such a right in the first place, not only retaliating afterwards. It would add a catch-all barring other conduct related to a person's perceived immigration status that would reasonably tend to discourage them from doing something they have a legal right to do, or push them into something they have a right to refuse. That reaches conduct aimed at someone the employer believes is an immigrant, whether or not that is so. A civil penalty of up to $10,000 for each employee for each violation would be added, on top of the existing right to sue. The Senate passed it 30-8. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 25, 2026Supports Labor Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 2646, which would set a $19.75 hourly minimum wage for a narrow group of farm workers. Farm workers are currently paid the general state minimum wage. The bill would apply the higher floor to approved agricultural employees, meaning workers living outside California who are allowed to work here temporarily or seasonally through an application the state has approved. It would also cover corresponding employees, meaning California residents doing the same or substantially similar farm work at the same time, for the same employer, in the same county. An employer who uses no approved out-of-state workers would owe nothing extra, so most California farm workers would be unaffected. From January 1, 2027 the rate would rise each year by the same cost-of-living percentage the Social Security Administration applies to benefits, which means no increase in a year with no adjustment. The Senate passed it 30-9. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 25, 2026Supports Labor Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 703, which would have required trucking companies at two ports to disclose how they classify their drivers. California presumes a worker is an employee unless the hiring business proves otherwise, and the ports collect no standard classification data. A trucking company serving the Port of Long Beach or the Port of Los Angeles would have had to file three things each year. Those are a workers' compensation policy covering its employee drivers, the number covered, and a sworn statement that it withholds all required taxes from the wages of any driver who is an employee. A driver who is not an employee would have filed proof of insurance and their federal, state and carrier registration numbers. From January 2027 the ports would have published that information, and quarterly details of every truck entering, including the owner, the authority used for entry and the named insured. A company replacing more than half its employees with contractors would have had 30 days to tell the port, with a $5,000 penalty for failing and $20,000 for false information. The rules would have applied to those two ports only. The Senate passed it 29-8, but the governor vetoed it, so it did not become law.

September 13, 2025Supports Labor Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to agree to the Assembly's changes to Senate Bill 294, the Workplace Know Your Rights Act. Every year, and to each new hire, an employer must hand out a stand-alone written notice of certain workplace rights, including what an employee's constitutional rights are when law enforcement comes to the workplace. The same notice goes each year to a worker's chosen representative. The Labor Commissioner publishes a template and produces videos for workers and for employers, and either the Commissioner or a public prosecutor may enforce the act. Employers must let workers name an emergency contact, and must tell that contact if the worker is arrested or detained at work, or elsewhere on the job if the employer actually knows. Retaliating against a worker for using these rights is barred. Penalties run to $500 per employee, and for the emergency-contact duty $500 per employee per day up to $10,000. The Senate agreed 29-8 and it became law.

September 13, 2025Supports Labor Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 31, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 963, which would have required property owners and developers to hand over public works records on request. Contractors on public works must keep certified payroll records, but the duty does not reach the owner or developer of the project. An owner or developer would have had to provide bid requests and lists, final contracts, contractor and subcontractor names and license numbers, certified payrolls they hold, and monthly workforce training reports. Those records would go to the state labor enforcement division, to jointly run union and employer benefit funds, and to joint labor-management committees. The owner would have had 30 days to comply, and 10 days after a follow-up request from the division. Penalties would have run at $100 for each worker for each day for payroll records and $500 a day for other records. A request would have had to come within three years of the work finishing, and the rules would not have applied to the state or its political subdivisions. The Senate passed it 29-8, but the governor vetoed it, so it did not become law.

September 12, 2025Supports Labor Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 7, which would have set rules for employers using automated systems to manage, discipline and fire workers. An automated decision system means a computer process using machine learning, statistical modeling, data analytics or artificial intelligence that produces a score, classification or recommendation used in place of or alongside human judgment. There is no general state law today requiring private employers to disclose or limit these systems. An employer would have had to give written notice to affected workers at least 30 days before using one. That notice would have listed the decisions it touches, the worker data used and its sources, any settings known to skew results, who built it, any quota it sets, and the worker's right to see and correct their data. Job applicants would have had to be told that hiring uses such a system. An employer could not have used one to break employment or civil rights law, to infer a worker's protected characteristics, or to punish a worker for exercising legal rights. An employer could not have relied solely on such a system to discipline, fire or deactivate a worker, and could not have used customer ratings as the main input. Workers could have requested their own data once a year. Employers under a union contract that expressly waives these rules would have been exempt, and the penalty was $500. The Senate passed it 28-9, but the governor vetoed it, so it did not become law.

September 12, 2025Supports Labor Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to agree to the Assembly's changes to Senate Bill 596, which tightens the fines hospitals face for breaking nurse-to-patient staffing limits. A hospital escapes a fine if it has used up its on-call list of nurses, and the law now spells out what that list is. Calling nurses who were not scheduled on call, and who are not in the backup pool for that ward and shift, does not count as using it up. The health department must also treat a breach on each separate day as its own violation. The California State Senate agreed 21-10, sending the bill to the governor, and it became law.

September 12, 2025Supports Labor Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 29, 2026

Voted to agree to the Assembly's changes to Senate Bill 578, which sets up a California Workplace Outreach Program once the Legislature funds it. The state labor department would pay nonprofit groups to teach workers in low-wage, high-risk industries about rights such as minimum wage, overtime, paid leave, safety and protection from retaliation, and to help them assert those rights. The program ends January 1, 2031. The Senate agreed to the changes 30-10 and it became law.

September 11, 2025Supports Labor Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 11, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 538, which makes it easier for the public to obtain contractor payroll records on government construction jobs. Contractors and subcontractors on public works must keep payroll records showing each worker's classification, hours and actual wages paid, and certified copies must be available to the public on request. Where a member of the public asks the agency that awarded the contract and that agency does not hold the records, the bill requires it to obtain them from the contractor and provide them. The contractor would have ten days to comply after receiving a written request. The Division of Labor Standards Enforcement could enforce penalties where the contractor misses that deadline, and the existing forfeit is $100 for each worker for each day. Failing to keep accurate payroll records is already a misdemeanor, so adding duties widens what can be charged. The existing rule that social security numbers and addresses are removed from public copies is unchanged. The Senate passed it 30-9 and it became law.

September 10, 2025Supports Labor Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to agree to the Assembly's changes to Senate Bill 464, which tightens California's employer pay data reporting. Employers with 100 or more workers already report pay by race, ethnicity and sex. The bill requires the demographic information gathered for that report to be stored separately from personnel files, and from January 1, 2027, raises the number of job categories reported from 10 to 23. Where the Civil Rights Department asks a court to penalize an employer that failed to file, the court must impose the penalty rather than merely being allowed to. The Senate agreed 30-10 and it became law.

September 10, 2025Supports Labor Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 31, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1362, which extends California's registration rules for foreign labor recruiters to the people who recruit farmworkers from abroad. Recruiters who bring in workers on H-2B visas for non-farm jobs were already covered; from July 1, 2027 the rules also cover recruiting agricultural workers on H-2A visas. Those recruiters must register with the Labor Commissioner and disclose who has a financial interest in the business. It passed the California State Senate 30-8 and became law.

September 10, 2025Supports Labor Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 30, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 858, which keeps a job recall law running until January 1, 2027. It covers hotels, private clubs, event centers, airport food and service companies, and the firms that clean and maintain office and retail buildings. Those employers must tell workers they laid off about openings the workers are qualified for, and offer the jobs in an order of preference. It protects workers with at least six months on the job who were laid off for reasons tied to the COVID-19 pandemic, and bars punishing a worker for claiming these rights. It passed the California State Senate 29-10 and became law.

September 10, 2025Supports Labor Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 29, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 692, which bars employers from making a worker sign a contract, from January 1, 2026 on, that leaves the worker owing money if the job ends. These stay-or-pay deals can require paying back an employer, a training company, or a debt collector. Some are still allowed: government loan-repayment programs, tuition for a credential the worker can take to another job, approved apprenticeships, certain signing bonuses, and contracts to rent or buy a home. A banned term counts as an illegal restraint on a person's right to work, and a worker can sue over it, for themselves or for others in the same position, and collect penalties. It passed the California State Senate 25-11 and became law.

September 10, 2025Supports Labor Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 27, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 642, which widens California's equal pay law and tightens what a posted pay range means. An employer may not pay someone less than employees of the opposite sex for substantially similar work, and larger employers must post a pay scale with job listings. The bill changes the comparison from the opposite sex to another sex, so it is no longer limited to a two-sex pairing. A pay scale becomes a good faith estimate of what the employer reasonably expects to pay upon hire, and the law now defines an applicant as someone not already working for that employer. The deadline to sue becomes a flat three years from the last date the violation occurs, replacing two years with three for willful cases. A worker may recover for the whole period a violation lasted, capped at six years. A violation is treated as occurring each time the pay practice is adopted, a worker becomes subject to it, or the worker is affected by it, including each affected paycheck. Wages are defined to include salary, overtime, bonuses, stock, profit sharing, insurance, vacation and other benefits. The Senate passed it 30-10 and it became law.

September 9, 2025Supports Labor Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1336, which would have made it easier for farmworkers to win compensation for heat illness. Workers' compensation already assumes that certain injuries to police officers and firefighters are job-related, leaving the employer to disprove it. The bill would have created that same assumption, through 2030, for heat-related illness, injury or death suffered by an outdoor farmworker whose employer broke the state's heat illness prevention rules. An employer could still rebut it with evidence, but if they did not the appeals board would have had to rule for the worker. A covered claim would have included hospital, surgical and medical treatment, disability payments and death benefits. One provision ran the other way for workers. A finding made in the compensation case could not be used against the employer before the state workplace safety appeals board. The bill would also have moved $5 million from an existing employer-funded account to run the program. The Senate passed it 30-10, but the governor vetoed it, so it did not become law.

September 9, 2025Supports Labor Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 393, which would have required the state prison and state hospital departments to compare costs before hiring a contractor to fill a budgeted civil service doctor or psychologist job. If the contractor cost more, the department would have had to use an available civil service doctor or psychologist first, and report each year on its use of contractors. The Senate passed it 29-10, but the governor vetoed it, so it did not become law.

September 8, 2025Supports Labor Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 11, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1340, which lets California rideshare drivers pick one statewide organization to bargain for them. The Public Employment Relations Board certifies it once 30 percent of active drivers sign authorizations, holding an election if no majority signs. The large rideshare companies, together covering 95 percent of rides, must then bargain in good faith over a single industry-wide agreement on pay, benefits and working conditions, including deactivations. If talks stall, mediation and then arbitration follow, though an arbitrator can impose terms only on a listed set of subjects. Any agreement takes effect only if the board approves it. No agreement may change drivers' independent-contractor status under Proposition 22, which the voters passed in 2020. It passed the California State Senate 29-10 and became law.

September 8, 2025Supports Labor Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 30, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 339, which requires cities, counties and other local public agencies to give a union at least 45 days' written notice before seeking bids for, renewing or extending a contract for work its members do. The notice must state the contract's length, scope, cost and reason. Construction, public works and related design and building contracts are exempt, and an emergency allows shorter notice. The Senate passed it 28-11 and it became law.

September 4, 2025Supports Labor Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 11, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1136, which would have given workers unpaid leave for immigration appointments and a right to return after a work-authorization gap. No state law now guarantees time off for such appointments. An employer would have had to release a worker, on request, for up to five unpaid working days in a year to attend an appointment, interview, hearing, detention matter or other meeting about their immigration status, work authorization or visa. The employer could have required the worker to use earned vacation or paid time off first. A worker past probation who was fired for being unable to prove work authorization would have been reinstated to their old job with seniority intact if they produced valid documents within 12 months. Where no position was open, the employer would have had to offer in writing every job the worker qualified for that opened in that period, with the longest-serving worker first. An employer told that a worker was detained in immigration proceedings would have had to place them on unpaid leave until release, up to 12 months. Employers with 25 or fewer workers were exempt, no benefits would have accrued during leave, and the rules would have expired in 2029. The Senate passed it 29-10, but the governor vetoed it, so it did not become law.

September 4, 2025Supports Labor Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 513, which gives workers the right to see and copy their own training records. Current and former employees may already inspect personnel records relating to their performance or to a grievance. The bill states that those performance records include education and training records. An employer that keeps such records must ensure they show the employee's name, the training provider, the duration and date of the training, the core competencies covered including equipment or software skills, and any resulting certification or qualification. Because breaking the personnel records rules is already a crime, widening what those rules cover widens that offense. The content requirements apply to an employer that keeps training records. The bill does not order an employer keeping none to start. The Senate passed it 29-9 and it became law.

May 28, 2025Supports Labor Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 1414, which would take redistricting in San Bernardino County away from the county's own elected supervisors. A county board of supervisors normally redraws its own district lines after each census, and eight other counties already use an independent commission instead. The bill would create a 14-member citizens redistricting commission for San Bernardino, drawing the supervisorial districts under the criteria already set in state law. A commissioner would have to live in the county, have been registered with the same party for five years, and have voted recently. Neither they nor their family could have held office, worked for a candidate or lobbied in the previous eight years. The elections official would screen applicants to the 60 most qualified, the auditor would draw eight at random including one from each supervisorial district, and those eight would appoint the remaining six. A commissioner could be removed for neglect of duty, gross misconduct or inability to serve, after written reasons and a public hearing, and that decision could not be appealed to a court. The commission would exist only if the Legislature appropriates money for it. This applies only to San Bernardino County. The Senate passed it 30-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 26, 2026Supports Anti-Corruption

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to agree to the Assembly's changes to Senate Bill 42, the California Fair Elections Act, which lifts the state ban on candidates using public money to run for office. Only candidates who accept spending limits and meet the qualifying rules could take it. Public money could not pay legal bills or pay a candidate back for loans to their own campaign, and the fine for taking money from a foreign government goes up. Because the bill changes a law the voters passed, it takes effect only if voters approve it at the election on November 3, 2026. The California State Senate agreed 29-8, sending the bill to the governor, and it became law.

September 13, 2025Supports Anti-Corruption

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 27, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1441, which takes redistricting in Merced County away from the county's own elected supervisors. After a switch to district elections, and after each census, a county board of supervisors normally redraws its own district lines. Eight other counties already use an independent commission instead, and the bill adds Merced to that list. An 11-member citizens commission would draw the supervisorial districts using the criteria already set in state law. Members must live in the county, have been registered with the same party or no party for five years, and have voted recently. Neither they nor close family may have run for or held local, state or federal office in the county, worked for such an official, or been a lobbyist in the past eight years. The elections official screens applicants, five members are drawn at random from district pools, and those five appoint six more. The commission must meet in public, hold hearings before and after publishing a draft map, and provide translation. Members may not run for California elective office for five years afterward. The Senate passed it 28-10 and it became law.

September 11, 2025Supports Anti-Corruption

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 827, which widens who must take ethics training in local government and adds a new financial training requirement. Elected and compensated local officials, designated employees and school board members must already take ethics training within a year of starting and every two years after. The bill adds department heads and similar administrative officers, including a district or county superintendent and a charter school's chief administrator. For officials starting from January 1, 2026 the first ethics training must come within six months rather than a year. From July 1, 2026 an agency with a website must post clear instructions and contact details for requesting training records. It also creates a separate requirement of at least two hours of fiscal and financial training, repeated every two years, for legislative body members, elected officers, officials who make budget or public resource decisions, and local agency executives. Existing officials would have until January 1, 2028. Courses must be developed with recognized experts in local government finance, and officials serving several agencies need only train once every two years. The fiscal training does not reach school districts, and the bill sets no penalty for not complying. The Senate passed it 30-10 and it became law.

September 9, 2025Supports Anti-Corruption

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1167, which stops utility customers paying for their utility's politics. Electric and gas companies may not put the cost of political influence work or promotional advertising into the accounts they recover from ratepayers. Every public message from such a company must say clearly whether shareholders or ratepayers paid for it. The companies must report related information to the Public Utilities Commission each year from May 31, 2026, and the commission must publish those reports and impose a civil penalty, scaled to how serious the breach is, on a company that breaks the rule. The Senate passed it 29-10 and it became law.

September 9, 2025Supports Anti-Corruption

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 31, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 630, which lets the state parks department buy and lease land with less outside review. The Director of General Services must normally approve a state contract to buy or rent property, that department must approve appraisals for parks purchases, and land for any agency must go through the State Public Works Board. The bill lets the director waive the contract approval and the appraisal approval for the parks department. Until January 1, 2033 it exempts qualifying parks purchases from both the director's approval and the Public Works Board, where set conditions are met. Those conditions include that the purchase does not create a new park unit, the price does not exceed $1 million, no extra capital work or resources are needed, and public notice and a public meeting have happened. The general threshold below which the director may exempt any state property deal rises from $150,000 to $750,000. For park leases the parks department would do the appraisal itself, with the General Services review of that appraisal able to be waived. The department must report to the Legislature in 2028, 2030 and 2032 on how it used the new authority. The Senate passed it 28-7 and it became law.

September 12, 2025Supports Government Efficiency

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 713, which would stop California's public colleges from requiring proof of federal work authorization for campus jobs. The University of California, California State University and the community colleges currently screen student job applicants for that permission. The bill would bar them from disqualifying a student for failing to provide it. Two exceptions remain. Proof could still be required where federal law requires it, or where it is a condition of the grant funding that particular position. The colleges would have to treat the federal ban on hiring undocumented workers as inapplicable, on the theory that it does not reach a branch of state government. The California State University and the community colleges would have to implement this by January 6, 2027. For the University of California it applies only if the Regents adopt a resolution making it apply. The Senate passed it 30-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 27, 2026Supports Immigration

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1633, which would tax companies that run private detention facilities in California. Starting July 1, 2028 an operator would owe a yearly tax equal to 25 percent of the gross income it earned in the state the year before. The tax would apply whether the facility is under contract to a federal, state or local agency. The money, less refunds and collection costs, would go into a new Due Process for All Fund and pay for immigration-related services once the Legislature appropriates it. The bill does not define which services qualify. Operators would have to register with the state tax department and file a return each July. Because it raises a tax it needs a two-thirds vote in both houses. The Senate passed it 30-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 27, 2026Supports Immigration

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 1323, which would tighten the rules on immigration enforcement inside hospitals and clinics, for three years. Health care providers must already mark treatment areas as non-public and may not admit anyone for immigration enforcement without a judicial warrant or court order, and must train staff on handling such requests. The bill would add training on how to respond when someone in immigration custody asks to notify a family member or support person of their location. The duty to set up visitor monitoring and documentation procedures would become mandatory rather than done to the extent possible. Posting a notice to authorities would become required rather than encouraged, at the facility's main public entrance. The warrant exception would require a physical judicial warrant, so an emailed one would not qualify. All of these strengthened provisions expire on January 1, 2030, when the earlier and weaker versions return. The Senate passed it 30-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 26, 2026Supports Immigration

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1049, which would stop a sponsor's income from counting against someone applying for state food aid. California runs the California Food Assistance Program for people who cannot get federal food benefits only because of their immigration status. Today the state applies the federal sponsor rules to it. When someone has signed an affidavit of support for the applicant, that sponsor's income and resources are treated as the applicant's own, which cuts the benefit or blocks it. The bill would end that practice for this program. It would begin on January 1, 2028, or later if the state's benefits computer system cannot yet handle it, whichever comes last. The Senate passed it 30-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 26, 2026Supports Immigration

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 2495, which would widen the ban on using someone's immigration status against them at work. Employers may not now engage in, or direct someone else to engage in, an unfair immigration-related practice to retaliate against a worker for exercising a right under state labor law or a local ordinance. The bill would extend that to any right under a local, state or federal law or regulation applying to employees. It would also bar preventing a person from exercising such a right in the first place, not only retaliating afterwards. It would add a catch-all barring other conduct related to a person's perceived immigration status that would reasonably tend to discourage them from doing something they have a legal right to do, or push them into something they have a right to refuse. That reaches conduct aimed at someone the employer believes is an immigrant, whether or not that is so. A civil penalty of up to $10,000 for each employee for each violation would be added, on top of the existing right to sue. The Senate passed it 30-8. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 25, 2026Supports Immigration

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 2465, which would cut off state grants, loans and tax credits to companies tied to immigration detention. A business would be ineligible for any state grant, loan or tax credit in a year when it invests in, owns, operates or manages a private detention facility, or contracts with one to provide covered services. Covered services would include detention, transport, custody and deportation, and also software, surveillance equipment, data analytics, artificial intelligence, weapons and officer training contracted specifically to support immigration enforcement. Health care provided under such a contract would be excluded. Every state agency handing out grants or loans would have to screen applicants. For the contracting route, only a publicly traded company worth at least $150 billion would be disqualified, so smaller vendors would not be. Blocked credits could be used later if the company stops qualifying. The extra tax collected would be estimated each year and moved into a new Due Process for All Fund for immigration-related services, and that money could not be used to replace existing funding. The Senate passed it 30-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 25, 2026Supports Immigration

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1806, which would extend the state's independent investigation of deadly shootings to immigration officers. The Attorney General must already investigate a shooting by a police officer that kills an unarmed civilian, and may bring criminal charges if the officer broke state law. The bill would create the same duty and the same charging power for a shooting by an immigration enforcement officer that kills an unarmed civilian. Each investigation would need a written report setting out the facts and giving an analysis and conclusion on every issue. Those reports would have to be posted and kept on a public website, with the redactions the law requires. Any refusal to give investigators access to witnesses, documents or evidence would have to be written down. The bill says it is not to be read as regulating the conduct of federal agents. The Senate passed it 30-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 25, 2026Supports Immigration

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1807, which would bar immigration enforcement from using California state property as a base. It would prohibit staging, assembling, mobilizing or deploying vehicles, equipment or personnel for immigration enforcement on state-owned land. It would also prohibit processing or detaining people there for immigration purposes. State-owned property would include garages, parking lots, parks and vacant land. State agencies would have to identify sites previously or likely to be used this way, post signs where feasible saying the property may not be used for immigration enforcement, and use existing barriers to limit access. By July 1, 2027 agencies would need procedures to record any attempted or actual use, with photo or video evidence, and report it to the Attorney General. The ban would not reach property under an existing lease, state corrections operations, or Caltrans land used for public transportation or sitting at a federal port of entry. It would not block a lawful judicial warrant. The Senate passed it 30-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 24, 2026Supports Immigration

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1655, which would keep a family's cash aid intact when a member is held in immigration detention. CalWORKs grant size depends on how many people are in the assistance unit, and a member who is only temporarily absent does not reduce it. A child in hospital already counts as temporarily absent. The bill would treat a child or other member held in a federal immigration detention facility as temporarily absent for the length of the detention. Three conditions would apply. The remaining members must still meet eligibility rules, a member detained out of state must intend to return to California on release, and the detained member must otherwise be eligible apart from being detained. A written sworn statement from the applicant would be enough to establish the detention. The department could act through county letters until it adopts regulations. The change would not take effect before July 1, 2027, and not until the state's welfare computer system can handle it, and the usual automatic funding for county CalWORKs costs would not flow to it. The Senate passed it 28-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 20, 2026Supports Immigration

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1801, which would make it harder for a local government to approve a private immigration detention facility. A city or county must already give 180 days of public notice and hold two public meetings before signing a land deed or issuing a permit for a private company to detain people for civil immigration proceedings. The bill would widen that to any document showing the government's approval to build or reuse a building, and would cover detaining anyone in civil immigration custody rather than only noncitizens. The government would have to provide the related documents promptly on request, on paper and electronically, subject to the usual public records exemptions. Notice would have to appear on the government's website and at its headquarters, in a local newspaper or three public places, and weekly on radio in the five most spoken local languages. The two meetings would have to be at least 30 business days apart and offer translation. The rules would apply to charter cities, and each public agency would have to meet them separately. The Senate passed it 28-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 19, 2026Supports Immigration

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 2624, which lets people who provide immigration support services keep their home address private when they face threats or harassment because of that work. Their employees and volunteers are covered too, and the Secretary of State starts taking applications on October 1, 2027. Participants get a substitute address that state and local agencies must accept in public records, plus mail forwarding and confidential voter registration. The Secretary of State may still give the real address to a law enforcement agency that asks for it, or under a court order. The law also bars selling, trading or posting their personal details or photo online with intent to incite an imminent attack on them or a housemate, or to threaten them. Those targeted may sue for up to triple damages, with a $4,000 minimum. It passed the California State Senate 30-10 and became law.

August 18, 2026Supports Immigration

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 29, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 1194, which would set up a fellowship program to expand free immigration legal help. The state already funds non-profits to provide immigration legal services to Californians, covering immigration remedies, naturalization and legal training. The bill would create an Immigration Legal Fellowship Project in the Department of Social Services to fund paid placements for lawyers and law graduates working at those organizations. The department would award grants or contract with non-profits to recruit, place, coordinate and host the fellows. It could set eligibility criteria, application requirements and funding priorities. It would report on how the money was used within reports it already gives the Legislature. Nothing in the bill operates unless the Legislature appropriates money for it. The Senate passed it 30-9. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

May 19, 2026Supports Immigration

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to agree to the Assembly's changes to Senate Bill 635, which shields sidewalk vendors from immigration enforcement through the local permit process. Cities and counties may not ask about or collect a vendor's immigration or citizenship status, place of birth, or criminal history, and may not require fingerprints or a background check for a vending permit. Records of that kind collected before 2026 must be destroyed by March 1, 2026, unless another law requires keeping them. Officials may not hand over a vendor's personal details, such as name, addresses, birth date, phone number, or identification, unless served with a subpoena or a judicial warrant, and that information is also exempt from release under the California Public Records Act. Any contract with an outside company that helps run these programs must require it to follow the same limits, and the contract ends immediately if the company breaks them. Local money and personnel may not be used to investigate, detain, or arrest vendors for anything beyond enforcing the vending rules themselves, though federal law still allows exchanging citizenship and immigration status information with federal authorities. The health enforcement agencies that inspect food sellers are bound by the same collection, destruction, and disclosure limits. Where a Social Security number would normally be required for a permit, a California ID, an individual taxpayer identification number, or a municipal ID must be accepted instead, and the number stays confidential. Street food sellers working from small carts get the same protections, and breaking these vending rules stays an administrative fine, never a crime. The California State Senate agreed 29-8, sending the bill to the governor, and it became law.

September 13, 2025Supports Immigration

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 30, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 695, which would have let community college students who were deported keep paying in-state tuition online. A student classified as a nonresident pays nonresident tuition on top of normal fees, and a student who leaves the country normally loses California residency. The bill would have exempted a student from nonresident tuition through 2029 if they left the United States on or after January 1, 2025 for a qualifying reason. Those reasons were immigration enforcement action, leaving voluntarily under the threat of enforcement, or being refused reentry after a brief trip abroad. The student must have been enrolled and not already paying nonresident tuition when they left, must sign a statement giving the date and reason and their former college, and must re-enroll in an online program within three years. The college would have had to verify the earlier enrollment. The exemption would have lasted until the student finished a degree, a certificate or the courses needed to transfer. A student who later resumed in-person study in California could have kept resident status and applied for financial aid. The Senate passed it 30-8, but the governor vetoed it, so it did not become law.

September 12, 2025Supports Immigration

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 313, which moves a parent's country of birth off the public part of a birth certificate. A birth certificate lists each parent's full name, birthplace and date of birth in the public portion, alongside a confidential medical and social portion that already holds data such as the parents' race and ethnicity. From July 1, 2027 each parent's birthplace moves into that confidential portion and is kept private. The information is still collected. It is no longer visible on the public record. Because this narrows access to a government record, the bill carries the findings the state constitution requires. The Senate passed it 29-10 and it became law.

September 11, 2025Supports Immigration

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to agree to the Assembly's changes to Senate Bill 805, which requires law enforcement officers working in plain clothes in California, including federal officers, to visibly show identification giving their agency and either a name or a badge number while carrying out enforcement duties. The rule starts on January 1, 2026, and a willful and knowing violation is a misdemeanor — but the crime does not apply at all to an agency, or its officers, once the agency publicly posts the identification policy the law requires. A posted policy counts as good enough unless a member of the public, an oversight body, or a local governing authority challenges it, and if the agency does not fix the problems within 90 days the challenger can ask a court to decide. The law itself exempts undercover and investigative work, named plainclothes state and federal regulatory roles, protective equipment that prevents display, urgent danger or an escaping suspect, SWAT and tactical operations, and dignitary protection details. It also rewrites the crime of impersonating a law enforcement officer to cover federal officers and impersonation by any means to defraud someone. A peace officer who has reason to suspect someone is impersonating an officer may ask that person to show identification. Bail bond recovery agents may not pass themselves off as law enforcement, and may not hand over a bail fugitive's personal details for immigration enforcement without a judicial warrant or court order. The California State Senate agreed 30-10, sending the bill to the governor, and it became law.

September 11, 2025Supports Immigration

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 30, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 419, which requires schools to post the state's guide on immigration enforcement where families can find it. Schools may not collect information about the citizenship or immigration status of pupils or their families, except where the law requires it. School boards must already tell parents about the right to a free public education regardless of immigration status, including the Attorney General's Know Your Educational Rights guide. That information could be given through the annual parent notice or any other cost-effective means. The bill requires the guide to be posted in the administrative buildings and on the websites of the local education agency and each of its school sites. It must appear in every language the Attorney General provides, and be updated the school year after any update the Attorney General publishes. The Senate passed it 31-8 and it became law.

September 10, 2025Supports Immigration

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 495, the Family Preparedness Plan Act, which lets more relatives sign the form that allows an adult to enroll a child in school and approve school-related medical care. A court can name an adult the parent chooses as a joint guardian when that parent will be unavailable for a time, including because of an immigration case, and those guardianship files stay private. School districts must keep their policies on immigration enforcement current with the Attorney General's guidance. Licensed child care centers may not collect information about a child's or family's immigration status, and must report requests from law enforcement for records or for entry to the center. It passed the California State Senate 29-10 and became law.

September 10, 2025Supports Immigration

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 27, 2026

Voted to agree to the Assembly's changes to Senate Bill 580, which orders the Attorney General to publish model rules, by July 1, 2026, for how state and local agencies deal with immigration authorities. The Attorney General must also publish guidance and audit standards for limiting how far the information in government databases can be reached for immigration enforcement. Every state and local agency must adopt the model rules, or its own equivalent, by January 1, 2027. The California State Senate agreed 30-10, sending the bill to the governor, and it became law.

September 10, 2025Supports Immigration

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 27, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1261, which pays for lawyers for immigrant young people in California. As far as funding allows, the Department of Social Services must set aside money to provide legal counsel to immigrant youth, and must weigh whether federal money has already reached organizations here when deciding how much to award and to whom. Contracts go to nonprofit legal services groups experienced in removal and asylum cases, or to a public defender's office that meets the same standard. The department may also pay for social work services that those legal groups arrange to support the young people. The Senate passed it 30-8 and it became law.

September 9, 2025Supports Immigration

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 31, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1348, which would have protected school funding when immigration enforcement keeps students at home. California funds schools partly on average daily attendance, and where attendance falls sharply because of a listed emergency the Superintendent of Public Instruction estimates the attendance that would otherwise have occurred and credits the school for it. The bill would have added immigration enforcement activity to that list of emergencies, through mid-2029. Relief would have been capped at ten days of missed attendance credited for each pupil. Where a school certified an independent study plan because of such activity, it would have had to either offer live or simultaneous instruction, or describe what prevented that along with the engagement, services and instruction it would provide instead. Documents relating to immigration enforcement activity would have been exempt from the public records law, so that records of pupils missing school for that reason stayed private. The change carried its own end date and the earlier rules would have returned afterwards. The Senate passed it 30-8, but the governor vetoed it, so it did not become law.

September 8, 2025Supports Immigration

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1303, which bars the state's discounted phone program for low-income households from handing applicant data to immigration authorities. The Public Utilities Commission runs the Universal Lifeline Telephone Service program, and no rule previously stopped applicant information passing to other agencies. The commission, its staff, the program administrator, lifeline providers and their contractors may no longer share any information an applicant or subscriber gave the program. That bar covers any local, state or federal agency and any immigration authority, unless there is a court-ordered subpoena or a valid judicial warrant. Data may still go to other public agencies as needed to verify eligibility, and aggregated data may still be used for reporting or program management where individuals cannot be identified. Those bodies may ask for a social security number but may not require one, in whole or in part, to apply or stay enrolled. Immigration enforcement is defined to cover civil immigration law and criminal immigration law penalizing presence, entry, reentry or employment. Separately, in the law protecting residential phone subscribers' calling and billing records, the undefined term lawful process now means a court-ordered subpoena or judicial warrant, which cuts off informal law enforcement requests. The Senate passed it 29-9 and it became law.

September 8, 2025Supports Immigration

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1318, an urgent measure that took effect at once. Wherever state law looks at a charity's federal tax-exempt status to decide who can receive a state grant, contract, or payment, state tax-exempt status now counts as well. The same change reaches the charities that run state programs for refugees and immigrants, which pay for immigration lawyers, emergency help, and resettlement support for people granted asylum. It passed the California State Senate 29-10 and became law.

September 8, 2025Supports Immigration

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 29, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 681, which raises how much graduate students may borrow under the state's DREAM Loan Program. That program lends money for college to certain students at the University of California and California State University who generally cannot obtain federal loans. The limits are now $4,000 in one academic year and $40,000 in total, with $20,000 as an undergraduate and $20,000 as a graduate student. The bill leaves the undergraduate limits alone. It raises the graduate yearly ceiling to $20,500 and the graduate lifetime ceiling to $118,500. A student borrowing at both levels could reach $138,500 in total rather than $40,000. The Senate passed it 30-9 and it became law.

September 4, 2025Supports Immigration

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1136, which would have given workers unpaid leave for immigration appointments and a right to return after a work-authorization gap. No state law now guarantees time off for such appointments. An employer would have had to release a worker, on request, for up to five unpaid working days in a year to attend an appointment, interview, hearing, detention matter or other meeting about their immigration status, work authorization or visa. The employer could have required the worker to use earned vacation or paid time off first. A worker past probation who was fired for being unable to prove work authorization would have been reinstated to their old job with seniority intact if they produced valid documents within 12 months. Where no position was open, the employer would have had to offer in writing every job the worker qualified for that opened in that period, with the longest-serving worker first. An employer told that a worker was detained in immigration proceedings would have had to place them on unpaid leave until release, up to 12 months. Employers with 25 or fewer workers were exempt, no benefits would have accrued during leave, and the rules would have expired in 2029. The Senate passed it 29-10, but the governor vetoed it, so it did not become law.

September 4, 2025Supports Immigration

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 98, which requires schools and colleges to tell their communities when immigration enforcement is confirmed on site. Every district and county office of education must keep a comprehensive school safety plan, and colleges must already advise students and staff to alert the chancellor's or president's office about immigration officers on campus. By March 1, 2026 a school safety plan must include procedures for notifying parents, guardians, teachers, administrators and school staff when the school confirms immigration enforcement is present at the site. Timing and content must consider the safety and wellbeing of pupils, employees and the community, and the notice may link to resources on educational rights, privacy law and counseling. A chartering authority may deny a charter petition that lacks such procedures. State universities, community colleges and Cal Grant private colleges, and each campus, must notify students, faculty, staff and people who work on campus when immigration enforcement is confirmed there, giving the date, time and location and a link to resources. No notice may contain personally identifying information. The bill adds notification duties only. It does not restrict officers' access, and all of it expires on January 1, 2031. The Senate passed it 31-8 and it became law.

September 2, 2025Supports Immigration

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 1349, which would require the Legislature's own analyst to review six large tax breaks and say whether to keep them. California grants many exemptions, deductions and credits through the tax code, and no one is currently required to review them. The bill would require the Legislative Analyst's Office to assess six named breaks, publish a report on each and recommend what the Legislature should do. Those are the water's-edge election, research-activity credits, the stepped-up cost basis on inherited property, like-kind exchanges, accelerated write-offs for research costs, and a special income formula for cable operators. Each review would have to identify savings available from reducing or limiting the break. It would weigh whether the break is a cost-effective use of money against other ways to reach the same goal, its effect on the general fund and school funding, its effect on jobs and wages, and whether it should be improved or repealed. The first report would be due January 1, 2028 and the last on January 1, 2032, with a joint public hearing by the tax committees on each. State tax agencies would have to share anonymized taxpayer data. The requirement would expire at the start of 2033, and the bill repeals no tax break itself. The Senate passed it 30-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 24, 2026Supports Government Spending Reduction

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 938, which would stop former federal immigration officers from skipping California's police academy on that experience alone. To become a peace officer here a person must complete the basic training course set by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training, and the commission must offer a waiver for people with comparable prior law enforcement training. The bill provides that federal service whose main duties were immigration inspection, border enforcement, or the apprehension, detention or removal of noncitizens, and the training for that service, does not on its own qualify a person for the basic course waiver. The wording leaves room for an applicant who has that background plus other qualifying law enforcement experience. The bill changes nothing else about peace officer training. The Senate passed it 30-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 28, 2026Supports Public Safety and Crime Control

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 690, which would set rules for how counties pay lawyers appointed to defend people who cannot afford one. A defendant has a right to counsel, and assigned counsel receives a reasonable sum set by the court and paid from county funds. There are no statewide rules on what those contracts must contain. From January 1, 2028 a county or court contracting for indigent defense would have to include set elements, including compliance with the state public defender's standards for contract and panel defense systems. Contracts would have to ensure attorneys have the resources and time needed to provide competent representation, and state an hourly rate or its equivalent. A county or court could not use flat fee or per case contracts where special circumstances are charged, or in any case carrying a possible sentence of death or life without parole. That prohibition reaches only those cases, although the bill's findings criticize flat fee contracts generally. Counties contracting with a private firm would have to send those contracts to the state public defender every two years from 2028. The Senate passed it 29-11. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 27, 2026Supports Public Safety and Crime Control

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 1173, which would let a defendant ask the jury to consider a closely related lesser offense. A jury may now convict on an offense necessarily included in the charge, and a judge must instruct on one where the evidence supports it. There is no right to an instruction on a merely related offense. The bill would require the court, at the defendant's request, to instruct on a lesser offense closely related to the charge, if three conditions are met. The defense theory must be consistent with a conviction for the lesser offense, the evidence of it must have been admitted to decide the charged offense, and there must be some basis for the lower finding beyond simply disbelieving the prosecution. A judge could do the same where a jury is waived. The defendant would have to notify the prosecution no later than the start of jury selection, or before evidence in a court trial. That notice could be excused only with the prosecution's agreement or for good cause. The Senate passed it 28-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 27, 2026Supports Public Safety and Crime Control

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 2318, which would make it unlawful for an officer to block medical care for someone they are holding. There is no specific statute today barring an officer from keeping a paramedic or doctor away from a person in their control. The bill would make it unlawful to deny, delay, obstruct or fail to help arrange medical evaluation or treatment for such a person. That duty would apply only when it is safe and reasonable to allow access and a medical professional has been requested or is present and willing to treat. It would not cover someone held in a county jail or state prison. An officer who denies or delays care while a willing medical professional is there would have to document the reason within 72 hours, with a narrative giving the time, location and personnel involved, and any body-camera footage, radio traffic or incident reports. That report would go to a civilian oversight body, the Inspector General or the Attorney General. Failing to comply could lead to discipline including suspension or dismissal. The Senate passed it 26-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 27, 2026Supports Public Safety and Crime Control

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1650, which would require police to mark rented cars used to stop, arrest or transport people. A car rented by or supplied to a federal, state or local law enforcement agency for that purpose would have to carry a temporary decal on the front doors. The decal would show the agency's name or insignia, stand out against the background, and be readable from 50 feet in daylight. The agency, not the rental company, would make and attach it. The Attorney General, a district attorney, county counsel or a city attorney could sue to enforce the rule and recover legal fees. There is no fine and no private lawsuit. The requirement would not reach plainclothes officers, emergencies, tactical teams, protective details for officials, or officers doing surveillance, undercover or investigative work. It also would not reach transporting someone already in custody under a court warrant or extradition order, where an officer reasonably judges that a decal would be unsafe. That last exception does not cover civil, administrative or executive warrants, and does not cover the initial arrest in the field. It would not apply to rental contracts signed before January 1, 2027. The Senate passed it 29-11. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 27, 2026Supports Public Safety and Crime Control

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1595, which would make it easier to overturn a conviction after trial. A prisoner may seek release through a habeas corpus petition, and false evidence currently supports one only if the evidence was material to guilt or punishment. The bill would replace that with whether the false evidence created any reasonable likelihood it could have affected the outcome. For new evidence, the test would become whether there is a reasonable probability it would have produced a different result, enough to undermine confidence in the outcome. The same standard would replace the tougher tests now applied to motions to vacate based on official fraud, false testimony by an official or fabricated evidence. Where a prosecutor concedes a factual basis for relief in a signed filing that names that basis, the concession would bind the parties and could not be withdrawn. A stipulation could be withdrawn only on proof that the other side broke its terms or that the state withheld evidence that could have affected the decision to enter it. Courts could compel discovery for good cause and would have broad authority to fashion relief. The Senate passed it 30-8. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 26, 2026Supports Public Safety and Crime Control

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 937, which would add flash-bang grenades to the limits on crowd-control weapons and bar their use in immigration raids. Police already may not use rubber-bullet-type rounds or chemical agents such as tear gas to break up an assembly except under set safety rules, including a ban on aiming at the head, neck or other vital organs. The bill would apply those same rules to flash-bang grenades, which produce a blinding flash and a loud blast to stun or scatter people. A commanding officer at the scene would have to authorize their use, as is already required for chemical agents. Flash-bang grenades could not be used by any law enforcement agency for immigration enforcement, and peace officers could not use explosive charges to blow open doors and locks for that purpose. Both bans would still allow use as part of a qualifying joint task force or as otherwise permitted under the state's sanctuary law. Agencies would have to report each flash-bang use in the same public summaries they already file, giving the type, the number deployed, any injuries and the justification. The definition of law enforcement agency would expressly include federal agencies. The Senate passed it 29-11. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 26, 2026Supports Public Safety and Crime Control

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 1379, which would separate the coroner from the sheriff in Riverside County and require public reporting on jail deaths. A county board of supervisors may now choose to combine the sheriff and coroner offices, or to separate them and appoint a medical examiner instead. The bill would require the Riverside County board to do so by July 1, 2027, abolishing the coroner's office and creating an office of medical examiner. Medical death investigations would move to that office, and no one but the county medical examiner could sign a death certificate or any part of a postmortem examination. The county would have to publish an initial incident report within 24 hours of a death in custody and a preliminary report within 72 hours. It would have to keep a public database of deaths in custody by facility, cause, demographics and medical response times. It would also have to give public notice of serious incidents, including suicide attempts, overdoses, severe withdrawal, medical distress during restraint, and ignored requests for care that led to hospital treatment. Next of kin would have to be told the cause of death within 72 hours of it being determined. Coroner staff would move across keeping their classification, seniority, benefits and union representation. This applies only to Riverside County. The Senate passed it 30-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 26, 2026Supports Public Safety and Crime Control

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 2428, which would cancel a set of fees charged to people in the criminal system and wipe unpaid balances. A person in prison or jail who files a civil case must now pay the full court filing fee, taken in installments from their inmate account. The bill would end that, and old balances would become uncollectible from January 1, 2027 with those judgments vacated. It would remove the power of a probation officer or sheriff to bill someone for the cost of a temporary release, and the power to bill a defendant for a guard during house confinement. It would bar counties from charging any fee to take part in community service, and bar a court from refusing community service because it cannot recover costs. It would remove the authority to bill a jailed person or their family for medical, dental or eye care received in jail, leaving insurance and Medi-Cal as the sources of payment. It would end the fee for enrolling in a traffic-fine payment plan and the $50 traffic amnesty fee, and would repeal the section allowing a fine against a minor made a ward of the court. The cost of cleaning up an illegal drug lab would remain owed, but as a penalty rather than a recoverable cost. The Senate passed it 29-11. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 26, 2026Supports Public Safety and Crime Control

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 2122, which would end arrest warrants and jail exposure for infractions, mostly traffic tickets. Willfully failing to appear in court is a misdemeanor today, and a magistrate must issue an arrest warrant within 20 days when someone misses a court date without posting bail. The bill would apply neither rule where the underlying charge is an infraction. No bench warrant could issue at all for a Vehicle Code infraction, and for other infractions a bench warrant could only authorize arrest and booking at the scene followed by immediate release. Failing to appear on a Vehicle Code infraction would no longer be a misdemeanor, and courts would stop reporting those convictions to the Department of Motor Vehicles. Missing an installment on bail or failing to pay a traffic fine would no longer be a misdemeanor or support an arrest warrant, leaving a civil assessment as the remaining consequence. The bill would also remove the requirement that a court issue a bench warrant for a repeat roadside littering offense. The Senate passed it 26-11. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 26, 2026Supports Public Safety and Crime Control

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1886, which would cap how long a young person placed outside the home stays on juvenile probation. Probation for a ward of the juvenile court is already limited to 12 months from the most recent disposition hearing, but that cap does not apply to wards in out-of-home placements. The bill would remove that exception so the 12-month limit covered them too. A court could extend probation only after a noticed hearing and a finding, on the weight of the evidence, that it serves both the young person's interest and the public's. The probation department would have to file a report giving the basis, the young person and the prosecutor could present evidence, and the court would have to state its reasons on the record. If probation were extended the court would have to hold a further hearing at least every six months. The court could keep jurisdiction past the end of probation only to finish the transition process, and could impose no conditions during that time. The cap would still not apply to wards serving custodial commitments or committed to secure youth treatment facilities. The Senate passed it 25-11. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 26, 2026Supports Public Safety and Crime Control

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1905, which would restrict undercover questioning of young people held in custody. Police already may not use threats, physical harm, deception or psychological manipulation when questioning someone 17 or younger in custody. The bill would bar an officer from seeking statements through undercover officers, informants or others acting as agents of law enforcement. That would apply where the person was 17 or younger when the offense happened and is under 26 while in custody. In deciding whether such a statement may be used, a court would have to consider the failure to comply, and would weigh a willful violation when judging the officer's credibility. That rule would cover statements obtained on or after January 1, 2027. It would not apply where the officer reasonably believed the information was needed against an imminent threat to life and kept the questions to that threat. Questioning begun more than 24 hours after learning of the threat would be presumed unnecessary without good cause, and after 48 hours presumed unnecessary outright. Any such operation would have to stop once the threat is resolved. The Senate passed it 26-12. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 25, 2026Supports Public Safety and Crime Control

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1743, which would widen who can obtain the state's crime-gun tracing data. Police already report recovered crime guns to the Department of Justice, which keeps the data at least ten years and studies it for patterns such as where the guns came from. The bill would require the data behind those studies to be available on request to any California city, county or state agency, to the California State University and the University of California, and to certain accredited private colleges. The Attorney General would set the conditions and the format. The bill does not change who may buy, own or carry a firearm. The Senate passed it 28-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 20, 2026Supports Public Safety and Crime Control

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1376, which limits how long a young person stays on juvenile probation and softens what a court may order. A ward of the juvenile court could be kept on probation with no time limit. The bill caps it at 12 months from the most recent disposition hearing. A court may extend it only after a noticed hearing and a finding, on the weight of the evidence, that it serves both the young person's interest and the public's, with a probation report giving the basis. If probation is extended the court must hold a further hearing at least every six months. Probation conditions must be individually tailored, developmentally appropriate and reasonable, and no heavier than the interest they serve. The bill removes the court's power to impose a fine of up to $250 and to order unpaid work, leaving restitution and adding options such as family counseling. It also turns a set of conditions that courts were required to impose into ones they may impose, covering offenses on school grounds and public transit, truancy, assault on certain officers, drug offenses near schools, and graffiti. The 12-month cap does not reach wards held in juvenile hall, a ranch, a camp or a secure youth treatment facility. The Senate passed it 24-10 and it became law.

September 12, 2025Supports Public Safety and Crime Control

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1108, the Forensic Accountability, Custodial Transparency, and Safety Act. In counties where one official serves as both sheriff and coroner, that official may no longer decide the cause and manner of a death in custody. From January 1, 2027, the county must contract instead with an independent coroner or medical examiner office in another county, or with a qualified private examiner separate from the sheriff. A death in custody covers people detained, under arrest, being taken into custody or held in a county jail or state prison, and reaches federal correctional and immigration detention facilities as well. Boards of supervisors must renew those agreements each year, and a private examiner under such an agreement may not also be hired by that county for cases that do not involve deaths in custody. The Senate passed it 29-9 and it became law.

September 12, 2025Supports Public Safety and Crime Control

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 31, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 847, which lets civilian boards that oversee the police, and county inspectors general, see officers' confidential personnel records while investigating their conduct. Those records stay closed to the public: the oversight board must keep them confidential and may go into closed session to review them. It passed the California State Senate 23-10 and became law.

September 12, 2025Supports Public Safety and Crime Control

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 30, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1036, which widens the right to see the evidence in your own case after you have been convicted. The right used to cover only serious or violent felonies carrying 15 years or more; it now covers any felony with a state prison sentence. What must be handed over includes anything held by a prosecutor who worked on the case that points away from guilt or toward a lighter sentence. A prosecutor who wants to hold back notes from jury selection must first show the court how those notes bear on their case. It passed the California State Senate 28-9 and became law.

September 12, 2025Supports Public Safety and Crime Control

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 29, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 572, which makes every police agency and prosecutor's office adopt rules, by January 1, 2027, for interviewing the family of someone a police officer killed or badly hurt. Before that first formal interview, the officer or prosecutor must give their name and agency, show identification in person, tell the family what happened to their relative, and say the interview is part of an investigation. They must also tell the family they can bring someone they trust, and can choose whether to come to the station. These steps can be skipped if an officer reasonably believes waiting would lose or destroy evidence or put the public in immediate danger, or if the family member has already been given the same warnings or a Miranda warning. The law separately bars threats, lies, fake evidence, and misleading statements to press someone into an interview or during one. It passed the California State Senate 22-10 and became law.

September 12, 2025Supports Public Safety and Crime Control

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 29, 2026

Voted to agree to the Assembly's changes to Senate Bill 805, which requires law enforcement officers working in plain clothes in California, including federal officers, to visibly show identification giving their agency and either a name or a badge number while carrying out enforcement duties. The rule starts on January 1, 2026, and a willful and knowing violation is a misdemeanor — but the crime does not apply at all to an agency, or its officers, once the agency publicly posts the identification policy the law requires. A posted policy counts as good enough unless a member of the public, an oversight body, or a local governing authority challenges it, and if the agency does not fix the problems within 90 days the challenger can ask a court to decide. The law itself exempts undercover and investigative work, named plainclothes state and federal regulatory roles, protective equipment that prevents display, urgent danger or an escaping suspect, SWAT and tactical operations, and dignitary protection details. It also rewrites the crime of impersonating a law enforcement officer to cover federal officers and impersonation by any means to defraud someone. A peace officer who has reason to suspect someone is impersonating an officer may ask that person to show identification. Bail bond recovery agents may not pass themselves off as law enforcement, and may not hand over a bail fugitive's personal details for immigration enforcement without a judicial warrant or court order. The California State Senate agreed 30-10, sending the bill to the governor, and it became law.

September 11, 2025Supports Public Safety and Crime Control

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 30, 2026

Voted to agree to the Assembly's changes to Senate Bill 627, which makes it a crime for a law enforcement officer to wear a face covering that hides who they are while on duty. The rule reaches federal agents and officers from other states working in California, and a willful and knowing violation is an infraction or a misdemeanor. Officers may still cover their faces while working undercover, during tactical or SWAT operations, where health and safety law requires it, to protect their identity during a prosecution, or as a disability accommodation. Every agency working in the state must post a written face-covering policy by July 1, 2026, and officers whose agency posts one that follows the law cannot be charged. An officer who is found to have committed assault, battery, false imprisonment, false arrest, abuse of process or malicious prosecution while illegally masked loses any immunity for that conduct and owes the victim at least $10,000. The California State Senate agreed 28-11, sending the bill to the governor, and it became law.

September 11, 2025Supports Public Safety and Crime Control

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 27, 2026

Voted to agree to the Assembly's changes to Senate Bill 524, which makes every police agency set rules for official reports written with artificial intelligence. Such a report must say that a computer helped write it and carry the signature of the officer who prepared it, and the first computer-written draft must be kept as long as the report. That draft does not count as the officer's own statement, and the agency must keep a log of who used the tool and what video or audio it worked from. The companies supplying these tools may not share, sell, or otherwise use police information except for that agency's work or under a court order, though they may look at it to fix faults, reduce bias, and improve accuracy. The California State Senate agreed 28-10, sending the bill to the governor, and it became law.

September 10, 2025Supports Public Safety and Crime Control

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 29, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 812, which requires the prison system to set rules for referring incarcerated firefighters for resentencing. A court may recall a sentence and impose a lesser one, including on a recommendation from the corrections secretary, and incarcerated people work fire prevention and control through the conservation camps. No rule governs referring those firefighters for resentencing. By July 1, 2027 the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation must adopt regulations on referring current and former conservation camp participants still in custody, and people working at institutional firehouses, through the existing extraordinary conduct referral process. Those regulations must allow referral of eligible people who have two or more years left to serve. They may not exclude someone solely because of a past or pending parole hearing date, and may not impose a minimum time served as a condition of consideration. The duty is to write referral rules. The court still decides any resentencing, and the bill releases no one by itself. The Senate passed it 30-10 and it became law.

September 9, 2025Supports Public Safety and Crime Control

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 461, which ends the crime of being the parent of a chronically truant child. California requires children aged 6 to 18 to attend school, and a chronic truant is a pupil absent without a valid excuse for a tenth or more of the school days. The parent or guardian of such a pupil in kindergarten through eighth grade could be charged with a misdemeanor if they failed to reasonably supervise and encourage attendance after being offered support services. That carried a fine of up to $2,000, up to a year in county jail, or both. The bill repeals that offense outright and puts nothing in its place. Every other route for addressing truancy, including school attendance review boards, remains untouched. The Senate passed it 29-9 and it became law.

September 9, 2025Supports Public Safety and Crime Control

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 551, which rewrites the stated purpose of California's prison system around normalization and dynamic security. State law already says sentencing serves public safety through punishment, rehabilitation and restorative justice, and that prisons should offer education and rehabilitation programs. The bill adds findings built on two ideas. Normalization means life inside prison should resemble life outside as far as possible, aside from the loss of liberty. Dynamic security means safety comes from ongoing respectful contact between staff and prisoners, not from locks and controls alone. The corrections department must keep a mission statement consistent with those ideas, and must facilitate access for community-based programs run by outside groups inside prisons. Promoting personal growth is added to the stated goals of adult incarceration. The department should develop training for all correctional staff on both ideas. The findings also caution that normalization must not lead to inhumane conditions. Most of the bill is policy language and a mission statement rather than operational rules, and it creates no prisoner right and no way to enforce one. The Senate passed it 30-9 and it became law.

September 9, 2025Supports Public Safety and Crime Control

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 1388, which would create a state service helping affordable housing providers with insurance costs. Some providers face large premium increases, and the bill's findings cite rises as high as 500 percent. The Department of Housing and Community Development would run an Affordable Housing Risk Reduction Program offering technical assistance and resources to help providers reduce risk and find more affordable insurance. The department would have to develop assistance supporting providers preparing to join, and joining, alternative risk financing entities, meaning bodies that manage risk outside ordinary commercial insurance such as captives, risk retention groups and joint powers authorities. That help could include analyzing risk, identifying the most effective mitigation measures and helping locate funding for them, and identifying such entities and assisting with applications. The department could hire outside consultants and offer both one-to-one help and shared tools such as training and best practice guides. The bill provides advice and guidance. It provides no insurance, no backstop and no money. The Senate passed it 30-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 28, 2026Supports Housing Affordability

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 956, which requires cities to approve two backyard homes on a lot rather than one. An accessory dwelling unit is a small separate home on the same lot as a house. A homeowners association rule or a deed restriction that blocks or unreasonably restricts one is void on a lot zoned for single-family use. The bill widens that to a lot zoned to allow single-family use, so it covers lots where houses are one of several permitted uses. A city must currently approve, without discretion or a hearing, a building permit for one detached newly built accessory dwelling unit within four-foot side and rear setbacks, and the bill raises that to two. Where two such units have been built on a lot, the city is not required to approve a junior accessory dwelling unit as well. The Senate passed it 28-7. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 25, 2026Supports Housing Affordability

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 2128, which would bar public housing agencies from putting time limits or work requirements on tenants. Housing authorities run federally subsidized housing including public housing, Section 8 vouchers and project-based assistance. The bill would prohibit a covered housing provider from making a term limit, meaning a cap on how long someone may live there, a condition of eligibility. It would equally prohibit requiring a tenant to work, study, train, volunteer or do community service as a condition. Neither could be used to change the size of a tenant's rent subsidy. A provider could still run a voluntary job or training program, as long as taking part does not affect eligibility or subsidy and the program aims at raising income, savings, education or job skills. The ban would not apply where federal law requires the condition. It would not reach agencies in the federal Moving to Work program whose rules follow federal guidance, and it would leave the federal family self-sufficiency program and the federal public housing community service requirement in place. The Senate passed it 30-9. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 25, 2026Supports Housing Affordability

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 1093, which would set what a mobilehome park owner owes residents after a disaster. Existing law already gives displaced residents first refusal if the park is rebuilt and refunds prepaid rent when a tenancy ends from disaster damage. The bill would require management to make a good faith effort to send written status updates weekly for four weeks, then monthly, until residents can return or the park is formally closed. Management could not keep a resident from reaching their home during business hours to collect belongings or inspect damage more than seven days after evacuation orders are lifted or eased. Any liability waiver handed to a resident would have to be limited to harm from that access. Before seeking to close or convert the park, management would have to at least reasonably evaluate the cost of rebuilding and identify possible funding, using a list the state housing department would maintain. Until that documentation is filed with the department, the local government and the residents, no approval or permit could issue, and the local body could not approve a change of use. A resident, a resident organization or a public attorney could sue over a willful violation. The Senate passed it 30-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 24, 2026Supports Housing Affordability

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 851, which bans cold-call offers to buy homes in areas burned by the January 2025 wildfires. A temporary executive order had blocked lowball offers below the pre-fire value, and it expired in July 2025. The bill makes it unlawful to make an unsolicited offer to purchase residential property in fifteen named ZIP codes in Los Angeles and Ventura Counties, at any price rather than only below value. An unsolicited offer means one by text, email, telephone, mail or other communication, unless the owner had publicly signaled a wish to sell through a listing, a sign, an advertisement or a posted flyer. Buyer and seller must sign a statement that the deal did not come from a banned offer, and the buyer must record it with the deed. A seller may cancel a purchase agreement made in violation for up to four months. The Attorney General, a county counsel, city attorney or district attorney may sue, with penalties up to $25,000 for each violation, and a violation is also a misdemeanor. The rules apply to those two counties only and expire at the start of 2027. The Senate passed it 30-8 and it became law.

September 10, 2025Supports Housing Affordability

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 507, which makes converting existing buildings into housing far easier. From July 1, 2026, a qualifying adaptive reuse project is allowed in any zone and gets a streamlined approval with no discretionary review and no environmental impact report. To qualify, a building must be under 50 years old or meet historic preservation standards. The project must also set aside affordable homes: for rentals, 8% very low income plus 5% extremely low income, or 15% lower income; for homes to buy, 30% at moderate income or 15% at lower income. Projects must meet prevailing wage, apprenticeship and health care spending standards for their workers. No parking is required where the building has none, impact fees are limited to the actual added impact of the change of use, and local governments may not force changes to the building's outer shell. Industrial zones that bar housing are excluded. A city may write its own adaptive reuse ordinance with different procedures, so long as it does not shut off this route, and from 2026-27 may pay a project the growth in its property tax for up to 30 years. The Senate passed it 30-9 and it became law.

September 10, 2025Supports Housing Affordability

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 31, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1050, which widens an existing route around private deed restrictions that block housing. California already lets the owner of an affordable housing development record a document setting aside recorded covenants that limit how many homes may be built, or their size or location. The bill extends that route to a developer converting an existing commercial property to include homes, and applies it to restrictions written into reciprocal easement agreements and to covenants that bar residential use outright. Nothing in it authorizes a development that state housing law, the local general plan or zoning would not otherwise allow. The Senate passed it 31-9 and it became law.

September 10, 2025Supports Housing Affordability

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 31, 2026

Voted to agree to the Assembly's changes to Senate Bill 262, which widens what counts as a prohousing policy when the state rates how well a city or county supports new housing. Policies that keep people in the homes they already have now count, alongside the existing examples such as local money for housing and zoning that allows homes to be built by right. A city or county rated prohousing gets extra points when it applies for certain state funding programs. The California State Senate agreed 27-11, sending the bill to the governor, and it became law.

September 9, 2025Supports Housing Affordability

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 30, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 57, which would have reserved part of a state down-payment fund for descendants of enslaved people. The California Dream for All program makes shared appreciation loans to first-time homebuyers, meaning the state helps with the down payment and later takes a share of the home's rise in value. The money sits in a fund that is paid out without a fresh vote each year. The bill would have reserved at least 10 percent of that fund for applicants who qualify for a loan on the normal terms and are certified as descendants of formerly enslaved people. The certification would have come from a Bureau for Descendants of American Slavery, which does not yet exist. The bill would have taken effect only if a separate bill creating that bureau became law by January 1, 2027, and the reservation would have begun only once the bureau set up a certification process. Because the fund is a fixed pot, reserving a share for one group leaves less for other first-time buyers. The Senate passed it 28-9, but the governor vetoed it, so it did not become law.

September 8, 2025Supports Housing Affordability

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 797, which would have created a state-backed program to buy and resell homes destroyed by the January 2025 wildfires. The California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank finances public infrastructure, and runs no program to buy fire-damaged homes. The bank would have issued tradable securities to stabilize property values in declared disaster areas, sold to banks and similar institutions and funded from their community reinvestment obligations. That money would have gone to qualifying entities, including non-profits and public bodies, which buy, hold, manage and later resell damaged residential land at market value. Purchases were limited to property damaged by the wildfires that began on January 7, 2025 in Los Angeles and Ventura Counties. Investors would have been repaid on a refinance or sale within seven years, and property held up to seven years after the disaster. Profit would have been split with 90 percent to the investing banks, 5 percent to the managing entity and 5 percent to the bank. Resale would have given priority to owner occupancy, though that is a priority rather than a requirement, and the program would have ended in 2030. The Senate passed it 29-9, but the governor vetoed it, so it did not become law.

September 8, 2025Supports Housing Affordability

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1296, which requires the state housing department to help school districts build housing on land they already own. Despite its official title referring to school reserve funds, the operative text is about housing. By January 1, 2027 the Department of Housing and Community Development must put a form on its website that a local education agency can use to register interest in using its own property for a housing project. The department must review what comes in through that form and post the information publicly. It must give technical assistance to any agency that files the form and asks for help with predevelopment work, either directly or through outside legal, financial, consulting or nonprofit help. That assistance may cover surplus land and local land use rules, funding sources such as grants, tax credits and loans, feasibility and partnership analysis, planning and environmental review steps, review of draft ground leases without negotiating them, and referrals to experts. The help is advisory only and creates no attorney-client relationship. The department must give priority to agencies serving high-need students or in areas with high housing costs or teacher shortages. The bill changes no land use, zoning or surplus property law and places no duty on any school district or developer. The Senate passed it 30-8 and it became law.

September 8, 2025Supports Housing Affordability

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to agree to the Assembly's changes to Senate Bill 358, which makes it harder for a city or county to charge a housing project the full traffic-impact fee when the project is built to generate fewer car trips. A project qualifies for the lower fee when it sits in a transit priority area, provides at most one parking space for units of up to two bedrooms and two for larger units, and lies within half a mile of at least three everyday destinations. Those destinations include a grocery store, park, community center, pharmacy, clinic or hospital, library, school, childcare center, or restaurant — replacing an older test based on nearby shops. A local agency that wants to deny the lower rate must make findings after a public hearing, now backed by real evidence in the record before or as part of approving the project. The law also removes the old language that expressly let agencies charge non-qualifying projects a fee proportional to their estimated car trips. The California State Senate agreed 28-9, sending the bill to the governor, and it became law.

September 8, 2025Supports Housing Affordability

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 30, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 893, which makes it easier to get fast-track approval for housing, including near college campuses. State law already allows streamlined approval, meaning a local government checks a project against fixed written rules and cannot refuse it on discretion, where affordability and site conditions are met. When deciding whether a site qualifies, a local government's review would be limited to the area the application says construction will physically disturb, not other land the developer owns nearby. Easements for public rights of way, utilities or other public improvements would no longer make a property ineligible. Mixed-income housing would become eligible in a campus development zone, meaning parcels within half a mile of a main campus of the University of California, the California State University or the community colleges, where affordability and objective standards are met. The requirement that all parking be set back at least 25 feet would apply only to parking above ground. Because environmental review does not apply to these ministerial approvals, widening eligibility also widens that exemption. The Senate passed it 31-9 and it became law.

September 3, 2025Supports Housing Affordability

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1061, which narrows a historic-buildings rule that had been keeping small housing projects and lot splits out of fast-track approval. Before, any site inside a listed historic district was shut out; now only a building that actually contributes to such a district, or a property listed as a landmark in its own right, is. Cities and counties may still set clear standards to protect the character of a district on the state historic register. A lot split still may not require tearing down or altering the buildings the law names. It passed the California State Senate 24-10 and became law.

September 3, 2025Supports Housing Affordability

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 29, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1049, which would stop a sponsor's income from counting against someone applying for state food aid. California runs the California Food Assistance Program for people who cannot get federal food benefits only because of their immigration status. Today the state applies the federal sponsor rules to it. When someone has signed an affidavit of support for the applicant, that sponsor's income and resources are treated as the applicant's own, which cuts the benefit or blocks it. The bill would end that practice for this program. It would begin on January 1, 2028, or later if the state's benefits computer system cannot yet handle it, whichever comes last. The Senate passed it 30-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 26, 2026Supports Social Programs and Welfare

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to agree to the Assembly's changes to Senate Bill 1125, which would set up a Water Rate Assistance Program to help low-income households pay residential water bills. It would create a fund in the state treasury, spendable only when the Legislature appropriates money to it, and lay out different steps depending on whether the appropriation covers a partial or a statewide rollout. The State Water Resources Control Board would have to hold a public hearing, adopt guidelines and report to the Legislature. Households could confirm they qualify by self-certifying under penalty of perjury, and the Attorney General could sue to stop practices that break these rules. The whole program would depend on that appropriation. The Senate agreed 31-9. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 26, 2026Supports Social Programs and Welfare

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 31, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 2510, which would protect cash aid for parents working to get their children back from foster care. Under CalWORKs a parent counts as living with a needy child for a period after the child is removed, and stays eligible for aid and childcare if conditions are met. The bill would clarify that a parent is not disqualified because only some of their children were removed, or only some have returned home. A child who has been removed would be exempt from the requirement that every child in the household have age-appropriate immunizations. Where a family's grant was cut as a sanction for not cooperating with child support enforcement, that sanction would end when the child is placed into out-of-home care. The county could not stop aid to the parent's existing assistance unit where the children were placed with an adult who was previously a noncustodial parent. A parent receiving family reunification aid would be exempt from the welfare-to-work participation requirement. None of it takes effect before July 1, 2027, and not until the state's welfare computer system can handle it, and the usual automatic county funding would not apply. The Senate passed it 30-9. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 25, 2026Supports Social Programs and Welfare

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 2395, which would make it easier to settle unpaid child support owed to the state. When a family received CalWORKs cash aid, the parent who owes support owes that money back to the state, and a compromise program lets the state settle that debt for less. Staying current on a support order for a set period is now a hard precondition, and the bill would make it optional rather than required. The amount a local child support agency administrator may compromise would rise from $5,000 to $10,000. A decision that a compromise would not be in the state's best interest is now final and cannot be reviewed, and the bill would delete that bar. From July 1, 2027 the state department would have to consult stakeholders and write regulations creating uniform forms, standards, procedures and notices. The application could not require the applicant to propose a repayment amount, would have to tell them about the complaint and hearing process, and would have to produce a decision within 180 days. Every local agency would have to publish information about the program on its website. The Senate passed it 30-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 24, 2026Supports Social Programs and Welfare

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1655, which would keep a family's cash aid intact when a member is held in immigration detention. CalWORKs grant size depends on how many people are in the assistance unit, and a member who is only temporarily absent does not reduce it. A child in hospital already counts as temporarily absent. The bill would treat a child or other member held in a federal immigration detention facility as temporarily absent for the length of the detention. Three conditions would apply. The remaining members must still meet eligibility rules, a member detained out of state must intend to return to California on release, and the detained member must otherwise be eligible apart from being detained. A written sworn statement from the applicant would be enough to establish the detention. The department could act through county letters until it adopts regulations. The change would not take effect before July 1, 2027, and not until the state's welfare computer system can handle it, and the usual automatic funding for county CalWORKs costs would not flow to it. The Senate passed it 28-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 20, 2026Supports Social Programs and Welfare

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1201, which would narrow when a parent can be denied help getting their child back from foster care. When a juvenile court takes a child into its care, county social workers normally provide reunification services aimed at returning the child home. A court may skip those services today if the parent has a violent felony conviction, whatever the offense involved and whoever the victim was. The bill would apply that exception only where the victim was a child, or was someone the parent had a child with at the time of the crime. A parent whose violent felony involved an unrelated adult could no longer be denied services on that ground alone. The Senate passed it 27-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 19, 2026Supports Social Programs and Welfare

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Wrote a state adoption law that the governor signed (Senate Bill 450, Chapter 757). It lets California courts handle more adoptions of children born in the state, and requires every adoption order to name any existing parent who keeps parental rights after the adoption is final.

October 13, 2025Supports Social Programs and Welfare

Source: leginfo.legislature.ca.gov · researched August 21, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1324, which would have widened who qualifies for CalWORKs, the state's cash aid program for low-income families with children. A child now counts as deprived of parental support through unemployment only if the parent worked under 100 hours in the past four weeks. The bill would have dropped that hour test, so the hours a parent works would not matter as long as the family stayed within the income limits. It would have paid aid to a family whose parent or caretaker is on strike or locked out, as far as federal law allows, and counted that person's needs in the payment. It would have counted self-employment as a work activity. Counties taking subsidized employment money would have had to say in their plans how they will keep those placements from displacing public employees, and avoid employers with a bad safety or labor record. The state would have had to study a wider CalWORKs and report to legislative committees by January 1, 2028. The Senate passed it 30-10, but the governor vetoed it, so it did not become law.

September 10, 2025Supports Social Programs and Welfare

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to agree to the Assembly's changes to Senate Bill 634, which stops cities, counties, and special districts from passing or enforcing local laws against people who help the homeless. No local law may stop a person or organization from providing support services, or from helping someone with the basics of staying alive. That means help with eating and drinking, sleeping, staying out of the weather, and staying clean and healthy, including handing out food, water, blankets, and pillows. It does not cover handing out plywood or other heavy building materials. The state calls this a statewide matter, so it binds charter cities too. The California State Senate agreed 22-16, sending the bill to the governor, and it became law.

September 10, 2025Supports Social Programs and Welfare

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 29, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1487, which widens what a state public health grant fund for transgender, gender nonconforming, and intersex people can pay for, and renames it to include Two-Spirit people. Grants may now fund job training, resettlement and social support for asylees and immigrants, and diversion and outreach programs for young people. The definition of health care the fund works from now takes in mental health services. An organization serving tribal populations can receive a grant if it applies together with a group that serves those communities. The fund only makes grants when the Legislature sets money aside for it. It passed the California State Senate 30-10 and became law.

September 9, 2025Supports Social Programs and Welfare

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 30, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 246, the Social Security Tenant Protection Act, which lets a tenant being evicted over unpaid rent point to a break in their Social Security payments as a defense, through January 20, 2029. It covers income lost because something the federal government did, or failed to do, stopped, delayed, or reduced the benefits the household normally receives. A tenant who satisfies the court of that, and that it is why the rent went unpaid, has the eviction put on hold. The hold ends at whichever comes first: 14 days after the benefits start again, or six months. The rent is still owed, and within 14 days of the money resuming the tenant must pay everything behind or agree a payment plan with the landlord. It passed the California State Senate 27-11 and became law.

September 9, 2025Supports Social Programs and Welfare

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 29, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 1255, which would create a state designation for colleges serving Latino students. There is a federal Hispanic-Serving Institutions program but no state equivalent. The bill would create a California designation recognizing colleges that excel at providing academic resources to Latino students, open to campuses in all four segments of higher education. An eight-member board including the Lieutenant Governor, legislative appointees, segment designees and the chair of the Latino Legislative Caucus would award it by a two-thirds vote. The California State University Chancellor's office would run the application process as a neutral administrator. An application would set five-year goals for Latino retention, time to degree and graduation, equity goals to close gaps, a strategic plan, three years of outcome data and a description of campus equity resources. A designation would last five years and be renewable once before a campus must reapply from the start. The designation carries recognition and an insignia. It carries no money, and nothing in the article operates until the Legislature appropriates funds. The Senate passed it 30-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 28, 2026Supports Public Education Quality

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1792, which would have the state's curriculum commission look at adding dating abuse and online abuse to school health teaching. The Instructional Quality Commission recommends curriculum frameworks to the State Board of Education. At the next revision of the health framework for public schools, the commission would have to consider including, and recommending for adoption, content on sexual health instruction covering dating abuse and digital violence. That content would cover digital and online safety, including intimate images shared without consent, deepfakes, online grooming, sextortion, stalking and the misuse of generative artificial intelligence. It would also cover age-appropriate teaching on legal rights and support for interpersonal violence, including restraining orders and how to seek help, and would be responsive to the experiences of LGBTQIA and gender diverse pupils. The commission is only required to consider the content, not to adopt it, and no school is required to teach anything. The Senate passed it 30-9. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 25, 2026Supports Public Education Quality

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 86, which would have set a deadline for the state to adopt health education materials for younger pupils. The State Board of Education adopts instructional materials for kindergarten through grade eight and sets the process for submitting them. The bill would have required the board to adopt instructional materials for health education for those grades on or before July 1, 2028. Those materials would have had to follow the board's existing adoption rules and align with the health curriculum framework the board adopted in 2019. The bill would have set a schedule. It would not have decided what the materials say, which is governed by that earlier framework. The Senate passed it 30-10, but the governor vetoed it, so it did not become law.

September 9, 2025Supports Public Education Quality

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1348, which would have protected school funding when immigration enforcement keeps students at home. California funds schools partly on average daily attendance, and where attendance falls sharply because of a listed emergency the Superintendent of Public Instruction estimates the attendance that would otherwise have occurred and credits the school for it. The bill would have added immigration enforcement activity to that list of emergencies, through mid-2029. Relief would have been capped at ten days of missed attendance credited for each pupil. Where a school certified an independent study plan because of such activity, it would have had to either offer live or simultaneous instruction, or describe what prevented that along with the engagement, services and instruction it would provide instead. Documents relating to immigration enforcement activity would have been exempt from the public records law, so that records of pupils missing school for that reason stayed private. The change carried its own end date and the earlier rules would have returned afterwards. The Senate passed it 30-8, but the governor vetoed it, so it did not become law.

September 8, 2025Supports Public Education Quality

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 681, which raises how much graduate students may borrow under the state's DREAM Loan Program. That program lends money for college to certain students at the University of California and California State University who generally cannot obtain federal loans. The limits are now $4,000 in one academic year and $40,000 in total, with $20,000 as an undergraduate and $20,000 as a graduate student. The bill leaves the undergraduate limits alone. It raises the graduate yearly ceiling to $20,500 and the graduate lifetime ceiling to $118,500. A student borrowing at both levels could reach $138,500 in total rather than $40,000. The Senate passed it 30-9 and it became law.

September 4, 2025Supports Public Education Quality

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 98, which requires schools and colleges to tell their communities when immigration enforcement is confirmed on site. Every district and county office of education must keep a comprehensive school safety plan, and colleges must already advise students and staff to alert the chancellor's or president's office about immigration officers on campus. By March 1, 2026 a school safety plan must include procedures for notifying parents, guardians, teachers, administrators and school staff when the school confirms immigration enforcement is present at the site. Timing and content must consider the safety and wellbeing of pupils, employees and the community, and the notice may link to resources on educational rights, privacy law and counseling. A chartering authority may deny a charter petition that lacks such procedures. State universities, community colleges and Cal Grant private colleges, and each campus, must notify students, faculty, staff and people who work on campus when immigration enforcement is confirmed there, giving the date, time and location and a link to resources. No notice may contain personally identifying information. The bill adds notification duties only. It does not restrict officers' access, and all of it expires on January 1, 2031. The Senate passed it 31-8 and it became law.

September 2, 2025Supports Public Education Quality

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to agree to the Assembly's changes to Senate Bill 1220, which would add serial-number tampering to the list of convictions that cost a person the right to own a gun. California already bars firearm ownership for 10 years after certain misdemeanor convictions. The bill would add the offense of changing, removing or destroying a gun's maker name, model or serial number, or dealing in or possessing a gun with those marks defaced, for anyone convicted on or after January 1, 2027. The Senate agreed 30-9. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 25, 2026Supports Gun Control

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 31, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1127, which bars licensed gun dealers, from July 1, 2026, from selling or handing over pistols that can be turned into machine guns. The law covers semi-automatic pistols with a cross-shaped trigger bar, which a small device fitted to the back of the slide can convert to fire repeatedly on one pull of the trigger. A first offense costs the dealer up to $1,000, a second up to $5,000 and possibly their license, and a third is a misdemeanor that takes the license away. Pistols delivered to the dealer before January 1, 2026 are exempt, along with sales to police, listed state agencies, and the military; sales between private parties handled by a dealer; and transfers to gunsmiths, other licensed dealers, and crime laboratories. It passed the California State Senate 29-9 and became law.

September 12, 2025Supports Gun Control

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 29, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1263, which targets untraceable homemade firearms. It becomes a misdemeanor to knowingly cause, aid or encourage someone else to make a gun unlawfully, including with a 3D printer or a computer-controlled milling machine. The law covering digital gun-making files is widened to cover computer-aided manufacturing files and files for machineguns and large-capacity magazines. Someone who runs a website that sells or hands out those files, and that encourages people to use them to make guns, is presumed to have broken that law unless they show otherwise. Someone harmed in California by a violation may sue for damages and a court order. Sellers of loose gun barrels, accessories and gun-making machines must warn buyers that unlicensed manufacture is generally a crime, and people convicted of these new offenses lose the right to own a firearm for 10 years. The Senate passed it 30-10 and it became law.

September 11, 2025Supports Gun Control

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 31, 2026

Voted to agree to the Assembly's changes to Senate Bill 704, which requires gun barrels to be sold or handed over in person through a licensed gun dealer. The rule does not cover sales to police agencies, the military, licensed dealers, or collectors of antique guns. It also leaves out transfers from someone's estate, a barrel already attached to a gun, and a barrel bought in the same sale as a gun that gets its own background check. Holding barrels with plans to sell them is also barred unless the seller is a licensed dealer. From July 1, 2027 the dealer must check whether the buyer is allowed to own a gun, for a fee of up to $5, and keep a record of the sale. A first or second offense is a misdemeanor, and later ones can be charged as felonies. The California State Senate agreed 29-10, sending the bill to the governor, and it became law.

September 9, 2025Supports Gun Control

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 27, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 608, which would widen access to contraception in schools and shops and let the state check sex education compliance. Districts and charter schools must already teach comprehensive sexual health and HIV prevention in grades seven through twelve, but the state does not routinely verify it. The bill would let the Department of Education monitor compliance as part of the annual review it already runs for state and federal programs. A local education agency could not stop a school-based health center from making internal and external condoms available and easily accessible to students in those grades at the center. Schools would also have to allow condoms to be handed out through educational or public health programs, community organizations, peer health programs, health fairs and health center staff. A shop could not refuse to sell non-prescription contraception to someone solely because of their age, including by demanding identification. Breaking that retail rule would not carry the criminal penalty that normally applies under the state food and drug law. The school provisions stop schools blocking access rather than requiring them to stock condoms, so their reach depends on whether a school has a health center. The Senate passed it 29-9. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 26, 2026Supports Women's Reproductive Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1930, which would route out-of-state demands for abortion and gender-affirming care records through the Attorney General. A person or business operating in California could receive a subpoena, discovery request or similar demand tied to an investigation of that care. They would have to notify the Attorney General at least seven business days before handing anything over, and could not produce the records until that time passed. The notice would include a copy of the request, with identifying details about patients or providers redacted. Where federal law or a federal contract, grant or Medicare condition demands a faster answer, the company would notify the Attorney General at the same time it produces the records instead. No notice would be needed if a court ordered the request, a California agency issued it, the care information is incidental to the investigation, or the requester attached a sworn statement meeting set conditions. A company could rely on that sworn statement. The Attorney General could try to notify the patient, could join a lawsuit resisting the request, and could sue over a false statement, with penalties of $15,000 for a false statement and up to $10,000 and $15,000 for other violations. The Senate passed it 29-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 26, 2026Supports Women's Reproductive Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 2164, which would extend California's shield to people who helped someone get abortion or gender-affirming care in another state. State law already treats an out-of-state law allowing someone to be sued over abortion-related activity as contrary to California public policy, and bars California courts from applying it. The bill would extend the protection for legally protected health care activity to a person who previously acted in another jurisdiction to aid or encourage someone in exercising rights to reproductive or gender-affirming health care. That protection would apply only where the acts were permissible under the law of the place where the person was at the time. The bill would also bar the Governor from recognizing an extradition demand where the alleged criminal liability rests wholly or partly on providing or receiving such care, assisting with it, giving material support, or any theory of shared or conspiracy liability. The existing duty to surrender a person who was physically present in the demanding state when the crime occurred would remain. The Senate passed it 30-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 25, 2026Supports Women's Reproductive Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 2531, which would open California's subsidized abortion and contraception program to veterans regardless of income. The state already funds providers who deliver abortion, contraception and gender-affirming care cheaply to people at or below four times the federal poverty level who are uninsured or whose coverage excludes that care. The bill would add a second route with no income test at all. A veteran would qualify if their coverage does not include abortion, or they cannot get abortion or contraception care through the veterans health system, and they are not already covered free through Medi-Cal or Family PACT. A veteran would mean someone with at least 90 consecutive days of active service or National Guard call-up, discharged under conditions other than dishonorable, or discharged earlier for a service-connected disability. A person's own statement of veteran status would be enough for the provider to accept. The state veterans department would have to link to the state abortion information website from its women veterans page. The veteran route would cover abortion and contraception only, not gender-affirming care. The Senate passed it 30-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 25, 2026Supports Women's Reproductive Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1973, which would widen which health professionals may perform abortions and at what stage of pregnancy. Performing an abortion without a physician's license is an offense, but nurse practitioners, certified nurse-midwives and physician assistants may already do so by medication or aspiration in the first trimester. The bill would replace that with a general rule covering any licensee whose own practice act authorizes the procedure, and would drop both the first-trimester limit and the wording that restricted the method. Throughout the law, abortion by aspiration would become procedural abortion, a broader term the bill does not define. A nurse practitioner or certified nurse-midwife performing a procedural abortion beyond the first trimester would have to keep written procedures for consultation, referral and transfer of care to a physician when a case exceeds their training. The existing training routes would be unchanged, and online or simulation-only training would still not qualify. The bill would state that the section does not authorize a nurse practitioner or nurse-midwife to perform surgery. The Senate passed it 29-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 25, 2026Supports Women's Reproductive Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1854, which would widen California's shield for abortion and gender-affirming care against outside investigations. State law already bars officers from arresting someone over care that is lawful here, bars agencies from helping out-of-state or federal investigators, and bars courts from issuing subpoenas for those proceedings. The bill would apply all of that no matter where the patient was. It would bar a state or local agency from knowingly arresting, or helping to arrest, a person the Governor has declined to surrender to another state. It would extend the data shield beyond communication and computing companies to California corporations providing financial services, meaning firms that take deposits, extend credit, move funds or transport cash. Those companies could not answer an out-of-state request for customer data without a sworn declaration that the request is not about protected care. The Attorney General could sue, and a court could impose $10,000 for a first violation and $15,000 after that, with a further $15,000 for a false declaration. The Senate passed it 30-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 24, 2026Supports Women's Reproductive Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to agree to the Assembly's changes to Senate Bill 497, which shields medical records from other states' cases against people for getting or providing care that is legal in California. For gender-affirming care, no doctor, health plan, contractor, or employer may cooperate with another state's inquiry, or with a federal law enforcement agency as far as federal law allows, in a way that would identify the patient. For the wider set of sensitive services, which includes reproductive health care, doctors, health plans and their contractors may not release records for an out-of-state criminal case or penal civil case; that rule does not reach employers. California courts and attorneys may not issue a subpoena based on those out-of-state cases. State and local agencies may not hand over prescription-monitoring data or spend public money helping such a case, and misusing that data is now a misdemeanor. None of this blocks compliance with a California criminal investigation, or with a licensing or accreditation audit. The California State Senate agreed 30-10, sending the bill to the governor, and it became law.

September 10, 2025Supports Women's Reproductive Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 30, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 82, which widens California's legal shield for gender-affirming care to match the one already covering abortion. Providers, staff and patients at reproductive health facilities who face threats may keep their home address out of public records, and the bill extends that to gender-affirming care providers, employees and volunteers. The ban on posting, selling or trading someone's personal information or image online with intent to incite violence now covers gender-affirming care providers, staff, volunteers and patients, and others living at the same address. Prescriptions for testosterone or mifepristone may no longer be reported to the state's controlled substance monitoring system, and existing records from before 2026 must be removed by January 1, 2027. Courts may not issue wiretap, pen register or search warrant orders to investigate any legally protected health care activity, not just abortion, and county bail schedules must set zero bail for such arrests. Police may not arrest someone over that care, agencies may not share information about it with other states, and courts may not issue subpoenas for out-of-state proceedings about it. The Attorney General may sue over a false sworn statement accompanying an out-of-state request, with a civil penalty of $15,000. The Senate passed it 29-8 and it became law.

September 9, 2025Supports Women's Reproductive Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1525, which stops California from disciplining lawyers over out-of-state penalties tied to reproductive and gender-affirming care. The State Bar may discipline, suspend or disbar an attorney based on an out-of-state felony conviction or a misconduct finding elsewhere, and may refuse to admit an applicant on the same grounds. The bill creates a category called an excluded event, which cannot support discipline, cannot be required to be reported to the State Bar, cannot be used as evidence of misconduct in California, and cannot be a reason to deny admission. An excluded event means a civil judgment, judicial sanctions, a felony charge or conviction, a misdemeanor committed while practicing law, or discipline by a licensing body. It counts only where it rests on another state's law that interferes with someone's right to receive, provide, recommend, enable or advocate for sensitive services lawful in California. Sensitive services covers reproductive and gender-affirming health care, contraception and related care. The shield does not apply where the same conduct would expose the attorney to a similar claim under California law. The Senate passed it 30-10 and it became law.

September 9, 2025Supports Women's Reproductive Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 260, which protects abortion medication and the people who handle it. It repeals old abortion criminal and parental-consent provisions that courts had already struck down. Pharmacists may dispense mifepristone without the patient's name, the prescriber's name or the pharmacy's name on the label, keeping instead a log that police need a subpoena to see and that may not be shared with another state. Pharmacists, prescribers, clinics and manufacturers may not be prosecuted, sued or disciplined in California for lawful acts involving these drugs, including prescribing outside the federal label. If federal regulators withdraw approval of these drugs, state drug labeling law stops applying to them. Health plans must cover mifepristone and may not drop or penalize a provider over another state's abortion laws. It took effect immediately as an urgency measure. The Senate passed it 30-8 and it became law.

September 9, 2025Supports Women's Reproductive Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 31, 2026

Voted to agree to the Assembly's changes to Senate Bill 1418, which would strengthen the rules on keeping election materials. Records that must be preserved after an election, along with certified voting equipment and electronic data, could not be destroyed until any election contest or criminal prosecution has been finally decided. The bill would spell out that the electronic media holding required data includes hard drives, solid-state drives, flash drives and memory cards, and would require that media to be stored in a sealed container. The existing crime of taking a package of ballots from an elections official would be extended to taking any election record, certified voting technology, electronic data including source code, or other material or equipment needed to run an election. As an urgency measure it would take effect the moment it is signed. The Senate agreed 30-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 27, 2026Supports Election Integrity

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 31, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1539, which would require someone to swear that a presidential ticket is eligible before it goes on California's ballot. The Twenty-Second Amendment to the United States Constitution bars electing any person President more than twice. Each qualified political party now reports its presidential and vice presidential nominees to the Secretary of State, who places them on the ballot, and nobody attests to their eligibility. The bill would require a representative of each party, of each independent presidential candidate and of each write-in presidential candidate to certify under penalty of perjury that both nominees are qualified to be elected President under that amendment. The certification covers the vice presidential nominee as well, because that person must be able to succeed to the presidency. Party and independent certifications would be due 75 days before the general election, and write-in certifications by 5 p.m. on the fourteenth day before it. Without the certification the names could not be placed on the ballot, and a write-in group would not appear on the certified list. The Secretary of State is given no power to reject a certification, so the check rests on the signer's exposure to a perjury charge. The Senate passed it 30-9. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 25, 2026Supports Election Integrity

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1664, which would require local election officials to alert the state when police or prosecutors seek election records. An agency or elections official would have to notify the Secretary of State and the Attorney General no later than one calendar day after learning of a warrant, subpoena or active investigation. That duty would cover election records and certified voting equipment the official holds. Either state official could then go to court to challenge the warrant or subpoena, or seek other relief. The requirement would expire on January 1, 2030. It would take effect at once as an urgency measure. The Senate passed it 30-8. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 25, 2026Supports Election Integrity

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to agree to the Assembly's changes to Senate Bill 73, which bars police officers from interfering with the running of an election and lets named officials sue to enforce that. No one may let a law enforcement agent see, disturb, change, or take voter rosters or voter lists without a court order, unless they are investigating certain voting fraud. For certified voting machines the rule is stricter: a court order is needed, with no fraud exception. Under either rule, officers may still help with logistics, transport, or security if the elections official has signed a written agreement with their agency. The Attorney General must publish guidance on answering law enforcement requests to enter rooms where ballots are kept. Taking a package of voted ballots from an elections official is now a crime, and an observer may not challenge a signature the voter has already confirmed. The California State Senate agreed 29-8, sending the bill to the governor, and it became law.

May 26, 2026Supports Election Integrity

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 29, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1411, which changes how counties reach unregistered voters. It repeals the old system, under which the Secretary of State set minimum requirements and designed a county's program if the county fell short. In its place, counties that do not run all-mailed-ballot elections must write and carry out their own voter education and outreach plan to find and register eligible voters, covering topics such as vote-by-mail procedures and the options open to military and overseas voters. Counties send changes to the Secretary of State, who publishes the current plans online and supplies a template. The Senate passed it 30-10 and it became law.

September 9, 2025Supports Election Integrity

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 31, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1979, which would apply medical privacy law to health chatbots and require a licensed person to stay in charge of clinical decisions. California's medical confidentiality law bars providers, plans and their contractors from selling or sharing medical information beyond what care requires, and already treats businesses offering mental health or reproductive health digital services as providers. The bill would add businesses offering a health care chatbot, meaning a generative artificial intelligence system with a conversational interface marketed as supporting health services that uses health information a consumer gives or that it infers. A health facility, clinic, physician's office or group practice would have to take reasonable steps to ensure a licensed professional keeps the ability to exercise independent judgment whenever care is informed by a clinical decision support system. No artificial intelligence tool could independently perform a clinical function the law requires a licensed person to perform, or direct or supervise unlicensed staff in performing one. Licensing boards could seek an injunction where a violation amounts to unlicensed practice. Systems handling documentation, scheduling, reminders and similar work that involves no professional judgment are excluded, and trainees may use these tools under supervision. The Senate passed it 30-9. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 26, 2026Supports Data Privacy

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 2448, which would require companies holding sensitive medical records to switch on security features they were only required to build. Businesses that electronically store medical information about sensitive services for providers, plans, drug companies or employers must already develop the ability to protect it. The bill would require them to actually enable those protections. The features cover information about gender-affirming care, abortion and abortion-related services, and contraception. They are limiting access to authorized people, preventing that information from being disclosed or transferred to anyone outside California, keeping it separate from the rest of the patient's record, and being able to automatically switch off access by people or entities in another state. Because breaking the medical confidentiality law is already a crime, extending the duty widens the reach of that offense. The Senate passed it 30-9. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 26, 2026Supports Data Privacy

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to agree to the Assembly's changes to Senate Bill 635, which shields sidewalk vendors from immigration enforcement through the local permit process. Cities and counties may not ask about or collect a vendor's immigration or citizenship status, place of birth, or criminal history, and may not require fingerprints or a background check for a vending permit. Records of that kind collected before 2026 must be destroyed by March 1, 2026, unless another law requires keeping them. Officials may not hand over a vendor's personal details, such as name, addresses, birth date, phone number, or identification, unless served with a subpoena or a judicial warrant, and that information is also exempt from release under the California Public Records Act. Any contract with an outside company that helps run these programs must require it to follow the same limits, and the contract ends immediately if the company breaks them. Local money and personnel may not be used to investigate, detain, or arrest vendors for anything beyond enforcing the vending rules themselves, though federal law still allows exchanging citizenship and immigration status information with federal authorities. The health enforcement agencies that inspect food sellers are bound by the same collection, destruction, and disclosure limits. Where a Social Security number would normally be required for a permit, a California ID, an individual taxpayer identification number, or a municipal ID must be accepted instead, and the number stays confidential. Street food sellers working from small carts get the same protections, and breaking these vending rules stays an administrative fine, never a crime. The California State Senate agreed 29-8, sending the bill to the governor, and it became law.

September 13, 2025Supports Data Privacy

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 30, 2026

Voted to agree to the Assembly's changes to Senate Bill 59, which keeps court records private when someone asks a judge to change their name, gender, or sex identifier. That privacy used to apply only to people under 18; it now covers petitioners of any age, and reaches name changes made to match a person's gender identity. Only named people, such as the petitioner and their lawyer, may see the records. It applies to petitions filed from July 1, 2026, to earlier ones if the petitioner asks, and to records already sealed. Nobody but the petitioner may post a sealed record online or anywhere else, and after six months a person may sue to enforce that. The California State Senate agreed 29-8, sending the bill to the governor, and it became law.

September 13, 2025Supports Data Privacy

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 30, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 7, which would have set rules for employers using automated systems to manage, discipline and fire workers. An automated decision system means a computer process using machine learning, statistical modeling, data analytics or artificial intelligence that produces a score, classification or recommendation used in place of or alongside human judgment. There is no general state law today requiring private employers to disclose or limit these systems. An employer would have had to give written notice to affected workers at least 30 days before using one. That notice would have listed the decisions it touches, the worker data used and its sources, any settings known to skew results, who built it, any quota it sets, and the worker's right to see and correct their data. Job applicants would have had to be told that hiring uses such a system. An employer could not have used one to break employment or civil rights law, to infer a worker's protected characteristics, or to punish a worker for exercising legal rights. An employer could not have relied solely on such a system to discipline, fire or deactivate a worker, and could not have used customer ratings as the main input. Workers could have requested their own data once a year. Employers under a union contract that expressly waives these rules would have been exempt, and the penalty was $500. The Senate passed it 28-9, but the governor vetoed it, so it did not become law.

September 12, 2025Supports Data Privacy

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 45, which restricts tracking people by their location at health facilities. Collecting, using, selling, sharing or keeping the personal information of someone at, or within about 1,850 feet of, a family planning center is barred; it may still be collected or used as needed to provide what the person asked for. That ban does not apply to doctors, health plans, their contractors, or entities already covered by federal health privacy law. The bill also bans geofencing, that is, drawing a virtual boundary around a place that provides in-person health care in California to identify, track, collect data on, or send notices or ads to people there, and bars using information gathered that way. Exceptions cover the facility's own care and security, search warrants, California subpoenas, and life-threatening emergencies. Research records that identify people who sought health care may not be handed over in response to a subpoena or a law enforcement request made to enforce another state's law restricting abortion, or a foreign penal claim. The bill does not change existing law on police use of data from electronic monitoring devices. People harmed by the location ban may sue for triple damages and fees. For geofencing, the Attorney General may seek a $25,000 penalty per violation, which goes to a reproductive justice fund and is then granted out for reproductive and sexual health education. The Senate passed it 29-9 and it became law.

September 12, 2025Supports Data Privacy

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 31, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 313, which moves a parent's country of birth off the public part of a birth certificate. A birth certificate lists each parent's full name, birthplace and date of birth in the public portion, alongside a confidential medical and social portion that already holds data such as the parents' race and ethnicity. From July 1, 2027 each parent's birthplace moves into that confidential portion and is kept private. The information is still collected. It is no longer visible on the public record. Because this narrows access to a government record, the bill carries the findings the state constitution requires. The Senate passed it 29-10 and it became law.

September 11, 2025Supports Data Privacy

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1303, which bars the state's discounted phone program for low-income households from handing applicant data to immigration authorities. The Public Utilities Commission runs the Universal Lifeline Telephone Service program, and no rule previously stopped applicant information passing to other agencies. The commission, its staff, the program administrator, lifeline providers and their contractors may no longer share any information an applicant or subscriber gave the program. That bar covers any local, state or federal agency and any immigration authority, unless there is a court-ordered subpoena or a valid judicial warrant. Data may still go to other public agencies as needed to verify eligibility, and aggregated data may still be used for reporting or program management where individuals cannot be identified. Those bodies may ask for a social security number but may not require one, in whole or in part, to apply or stay enrolled. Immigration enforcement is defined to cover civil immigration law and criminal immigration law penalizing presence, entry, reentry or employment. Separately, in the law protecting residential phone subscribers' calling and billing records, the undefined term lawful process now means a court-ordered subpoena or judicial warrant, which cuts off informal law enforcement requests. The Senate passed it 29-9 and it became law.

September 8, 2025Supports Data Privacy

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 1255, which would create a state designation for colleges serving Latino students. There is a federal Hispanic-Serving Institutions program but no state equivalent. The bill would create a California designation recognizing colleges that excel at providing academic resources to Latino students, open to campuses in all four segments of higher education. An eight-member board including the Lieutenant Governor, legislative appointees, segment designees and the chair of the Latino Legislative Caucus would award it by a two-thirds vote. The California State University Chancellor's office would run the application process as a neutral administrator. An application would set five-year goals for Latino retention, time to degree and graduation, equity goals to close gaps, a strategic plan, three years of outcome data and a description of campus equity resources. A designation would last five years and be renewable once before a campus must reapply from the start. The designation carries recognition and an insignia. It carries no money, and nothing in the article operates until the Legislature appropriates funds. The Senate passed it 30-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 28, 2026Supports Civil Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 873, which would widen the protection against civil arrest at courthouses. A civil arrest is one not made for a crime, and a person already cannot be civilly arrested inside a courthouse while attending a proceeding or conducting legal business, except under a warrant signed by a judge. The bill would extend that protection to traveling to a courthouse, being present at one, and traveling from one for any lawful activity. A court could issue orders to protect it. An arrest that broke these rules would count as false imprisonment or false arrest, and anyone who committed or assisted in the violation would owe actual damages plus $10,000, along with court costs and legal fees. Courts, judicial officers and court staff acting lawfully to keep order would be exempt from such claims. When court security staff know that a law enforcement officer has entered on official business, they would have to ask the officer to identify themselves and state their purpose and intended action, and request a copy of a valid judicial warrant. The Judicial Council would have to publish yearly statistics on civil arrests by county. The Senate passed it 30-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 28, 2026Supports Civil Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 747, the No Kings Act, which would let people sue in state court over violations of their federal constitutional rights. Federal law already allows such a suit in federal court against state and local officials, but California has no equivalent state law. The bill would make any person acting under color of law liable to someone whose federal constitutional rights they violate, and the definition of that phrase would reach officials acting under the law of the United States as well as of a state. Officials sued in their official capacity for money would be excluded, so the claim runs against individuals personally. A judge could not be enjoined for a judicial act unless a declaratory order was violated or unavailable, and could not be charged fees unless clearly acting beyond their jurisdiction. A court could award a winning plaintiff legal fees. Immunity would track federal law exactly. The bill states it does not make any immunity defense broader or narrower than it would be in a federal suit, and does not waive sovereign immunity or affect the right to move a case to federal court. Suits would have to be filed within two years, and for conduct before the act took effect only nominal and compensatory damages would be available. The Senate passed it 30-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 27, 2026Supports Civil Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 1164, which would rewrite the California Voting Rights Act into two separate bans and widen who can sue. That law now reaches only a local government using an at-large election method that weakens a protected class's ability to elect its candidates. The bill would add a ban on any election policy or practice, by a local government or a state agency, that results or is likely to result in voter suppression. Suppression would mean a material disparity in participation or access for a protected class, meaning any race, color or language-minority group, or an impairment of their equal opportunity to take part. A government could defend itself only by showing with clear and convincing evidence that the practice is necessary to a compelling interest with no less harmful alternative. The second ban would cover any method of election that dilutes protected-class votes, not just at-large systems. Proof of intentional discrimination would not be required. The Attorney General could sue alongside affected voters, but a plaintiff would first have to send a notice letter and wait 45 or 60 days. A plaintiff who wins in court could recover reasonable litigation costs and fees. Only a plaintiff who prevails from the notice letter alone, without a lawsuit, would have that recovery capped near $30,000 adjusted for inflation. A government found to have violated voting-rights law in the past decade would need the Attorney General's approval before changing its election method. The Senate passed it 29-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 27, 2026Supports Civil Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 998, which would add state staff working to prevent discrimination in schools. The Office of Civil Rights employs four discrimination prevention coordinators covering religion, race and ethnicity, gender, and LGBTQ issues, each appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate. The bill would add a fifth for disability discrimination on the same terms, and rename the LGBTQ post. It would set out what every coordinator does. Each would develop and provide discrimination education for teachers, staff, board members and administrators, give technical assistance on restorative justice resources when a superintendent or governing board asks, and help administrators address conflicts early. From September 1, 2027 each would track and report complaints and their resolutions, without personally identifying information. Four deputy coordinators would be added on anti-Black racism, anti-Asian American and Pacific Islander discrimination, anti-Latino discrimination and anti-Native American discrimination, each reporting to the race and ethnicity coordinator. The office would provide resources on cases involving more than one protected characteristic. The bill acts on state staff. It creates no new duty for any school district. The Senate passed it 30-9. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 26, 2026Supports Civil Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1930, which would route out-of-state demands for abortion and gender-affirming care records through the Attorney General. A person or business operating in California could receive a subpoena, discovery request or similar demand tied to an investigation of that care. They would have to notify the Attorney General at least seven business days before handing anything over, and could not produce the records until that time passed. The notice would include a copy of the request, with identifying details about patients or providers redacted. Where federal law or a federal contract, grant or Medicare condition demands a faster answer, the company would notify the Attorney General at the same time it produces the records instead. No notice would be needed if a court ordered the request, a California agency issued it, the care information is incidental to the investigation, or the requester attached a sworn statement meeting set conditions. A company could rely on that sworn statement. The Attorney General could try to notify the patient, could join a lawsuit resisting the request, and could sue over a false statement, with penalties of $15,000 for a false statement and up to $10,000 and $15,000 for other violations. The Senate passed it 29-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 26, 2026Supports Civil Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 801, which would require regular checks that banks, credit unions and mortgage lenders are not discriminating. The Department of Financial Protection and Innovation oversees banks and credit unions and licenses mortgage lenders, and examines mortgage licensees at least once every four years, but no routine fair lending examination is required. The commissioner would have to examine the books of entities under banking and credit union law at least once every four years for compliance with the non-discrimination laws that apply to mortgage lending. The commissioner would issue written findings, give a copy to the entity's principals, officers or directors, and take appropriate steps to ensure any violations are corrected. That written statement could not be disclosed to anyone other than the entity, law enforcement, or other state or federal regulators for investigation and enforcement. The existing mortgage lender examination would also cover those non-discrimination laws. Breaking one of those laws would itself become a violation of the banking, credit union or mortgage lending law, and the commissioner could examine officers and employees under oath. The Senate passed it 30-8. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 25, 2026Supports Civil Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 2164, which would extend California's shield to people who helped someone get abortion or gender-affirming care in another state. State law already treats an out-of-state law allowing someone to be sued over abortion-related activity as contrary to California public policy, and bars California courts from applying it. The bill would extend the protection for legally protected health care activity to a person who previously acted in another jurisdiction to aid or encourage someone in exercising rights to reproductive or gender-affirming health care. That protection would apply only where the acts were permissible under the law of the place where the person was at the time. The bill would also bar the Governor from recognizing an extradition demand where the alleged criminal liability rests wholly or partly on providing or receiving such care, assisting with it, giving material support, or any theory of shared or conspiracy liability. The existing duty to surrender a person who was physically present in the demanding state when the crime occurred would remain. The Senate passed it 30-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 25, 2026Supports Civil Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1803, which would add anti-hate-speech training to the harassment training California employers already provide. An employer with five or more workers must give two hours of interactive sexual harassment training to supervisors and one hour to everyone else, repeated every two years, covering prevention of abusive conduct. From January 1, 2028 that training would also have to include an anti-hate-speech component. It would address speech vilifying people on the basis of the characteristics employment discrimination law already protects. Training that already covers unlawful harassment and abusive conduct based on those characteristics would satisfy the new requirement. The Senate passed it 30-8. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 25, 2026Supports Civil Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 2393, which would let someone falsely arrested or held by a private person claim fixed damages instead of proving their losses. A person suing for false imprisonment or false arrest must now prove what the harm actually cost them, which is hard where the injury is fear and humiliation. The bill would let the plaintiff choose $10,000 for each of four things the defendant did instead. Those are wearing a mask or clothing to hide their identity, using handcuffs or other restraints, forcibly moving the person in a vehicle, and brandishing a firearm or other weapon capable of causing death or serious injury. That is up to $40,000 from the list, and everyone involved in one incident could be made to pay the whole amount. The total a person could recover this way would be capped at $250,000 for each incident, though proving actual damages would stay uncapped. The new remedy would not apply to a claim against a peace officer, a custodial officer, or the public agency that employs one. Punitive damages would remain available. The Senate passed it 30-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 25, 2026Supports Civil Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1876, which would write a broad nondiscrimination rule for health plans and insurers into state law. A plan or insurer could not exclude someone from enrollment, deny them benefits, or discriminate against them because of race, color, national origin, age, disability or sex. Sex would include sex characteristics and intersex traits, pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity and sex stereotypes. A plan could not deny or limit a covered service, including one usually associated with one sex, because of the person's sex assigned at birth or their gender identity. It could not refuse coverage, deny a claim or add cost sharing on those grounds, and could not use discriminatory marketing or benefit design. It could not apply a blanket exclusion for gender transition or other gender-affirming care that it otherwise covers. A plan could still deny a service for a legitimate nondiscriminatory reason such as medical necessity, so long as that is not a cover for bias. Coverage documents would have to carry a nondiscrimination notice and explain how to file a grievance. The Senate passed it 30-9. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 25, 2026Supports Civil Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 1328, which would extend a campus LGBTQ point of contact to branch and satellite locations. State universities and community colleges must already designate one employee at each campus as a point of contact for lesbian, gay, bisexual, asexual, pansexual, transgender, gender-nonconforming, intersex and two-spirit faculty, staff and students. The bill would extend that to branch campuses, satellite locations and other sites away from the main campus. A district could either designate an additional employee there, or require the main campus employee to hold office hours at that site, virtually or in person, weekly, monthly or as that employee decides. The contact's name and details would have to appear on the site's website and directories. A satellite location means a teaching site within 50 miles of a main or branch campus serving at least 100 students for a term. Health care, clinical training, research and telehealth sites, dual-enrollment programs with schools, and classes in state prisons are excluded. The University of California is asked rather than required to comply. The Senate passed it 30-8. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 24, 2026Supports Civil Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1854, which would widen California's shield for abortion and gender-affirming care against outside investigations. State law already bars officers from arresting someone over care that is lawful here, bars agencies from helping out-of-state or federal investigators, and bars courts from issuing subpoenas for those proceedings. The bill would apply all of that no matter where the patient was. It would bar a state or local agency from knowingly arresting, or helping to arrest, a person the Governor has declined to surrender to another state. It would extend the data shield beyond communication and computing companies to California corporations providing financial services, meaning firms that take deposits, extend credit, move funds or transport cash. Those companies could not answer an out-of-state request for customer data without a sworn declaration that the request is not about protected care. The Attorney General could sue, and a court could impose $10,000 for a first violation and $15,000 after that, with a further $15,000 for a false declaration. The Senate passed it 30-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 24, 2026Supports Civil Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1116, which opens online voter registration to citizens who have no California driver's license or state ID card. Today the Secretary of State's website can register a voter only if the state already holds their license or ID record. Under the bill a voter without either may register online by giving the last four digits of their Social Security number. Their identity is checked against their name, date of birth and those digits through processes the state and federal government already use. The Secretary of State must build an accessible way to collect an image of the voter's signature, and county officials may compare a mail ballot signature against it. The change takes effect on January 1, 2029. The Senate passed it 29-9. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 24, 2026Supports Civil Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 934, which would extend California's ban on conversion therapy for minors to cover gender identity. State law already bars a licensed mental health provider from performing sexual orientation change efforts on a patient under 18, treats it as unprofessional conduct, and requires the licensing board to discipline the provider. The bill would rewrite the definition as sexual orientation or gender identity change efforts, meaning practices that seek to direct a patient toward a predetermined sexual orientation or gender identity during mental health services. That covers directing a patient toward a particular gender identity by suppressing or constraining their gender identity or expression. The existing ban, the unprofessional conduct finding and mandatory discipline would all apply to the widened definition. The bill lists practices that are not covered. Those include age-appropriate steps addressing unlawful or unsafe conduct that do not push the patient toward a particular outcome. They also include non-directive therapy that helps a patient cope or explore their identity, and supportive counseling that respects the patient's gender identity. The Senate passed it 27-9. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 20, 2026Supports Civil Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to agree to the Assembly's changes to Senate Bill 294, the Workplace Know Your Rights Act. Every year, and to each new hire, an employer must hand out a stand-alone written notice of certain workplace rights, including what an employee's constitutional rights are when law enforcement comes to the workplace. The same notice goes each year to a worker's chosen representative. The Labor Commissioner publishes a template and produces videos for workers and for employers, and either the Commissioner or a public prosecutor may enforce the act. Employers must let workers name an emergency contact, and must tell that contact if the worker is arrested or detained at work, or elsewhere on the job if the employer actually knows. Retaliating against a worker for using these rights is barred. Penalties run to $500 per employee, and for the emergency-contact duty $500 per employee per day up to $10,000. The Senate agreed 29-8 and it became law.

September 13, 2025Supports Civil Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 31, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1079, which lets a court's fix for illegal local election rules take effect while the losing side appeals, instead of being frozen automatically. It applies when a trial court finds that a city or district's at-large elections break the California Voting Rights Act, or that its district lines break the FAIR MAPS Act, or are likely to. The trial court can still pause its own order, and may also pause it if the Secretary of State certifies that a pause is needed to run the state's elections in an orderly way. The side found in the wrong repays county election officials for the cost of running an election under the order. None of this applies to cases already begun on or before January 1, 2026. It passed the California State Senate 25-13 and became law.

September 12, 2025Supports Civil Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 30, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 418, which would have required health plans to cover a year's supply of hormone therapy at once and banned discrimination by insurers. Plans set their own limits today on how much of a prescription they will cover in one go. The bill would have required a plan or policy with outpatient drug benefits to cover up to a 12-month supply of approved prescription hormone therapy, dispensed at one time, when a network provider prescribes it. Plans could not have used approval rules or other management to cut that supply below 12 months, though they could still have limited refills in the final quarter of a year in which a full supply had already been dispensed. Medi-Cal would have covered the therapy, but Medi-Cal managed care plans, which cover most enrollees, were excluded. Pharmacists would have had to dispense up to a year's supply, subject to an exception. Separately the bill would have barred any plan or insurer from denying enrollment, benefits or coverage, or adding cost sharing, because of race, color, national origin, age, disability or sex, with sex including intersex traits, pregnancy and gender identity. The hormone supply rules would have expired at the start of 2035; the nondiscrimination rules had no end date. The Senate passed it 29-10, but the governor vetoed it, so it did not become law.

September 11, 2025Supports Civil Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1071, which helps a defendant who says the state pursued their conviction or sentence because of their race, ethnicity, or national origin. They can ask the court to order the release of all the evidence bearing on that claim. A judge who finds such a violation can also fix it with any remedy another law does not forbid. It passed the California State Senate 25-11 and became law.

September 11, 2025Supports Civil Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 29, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 388, which would have created a California Latino Commission to study inequities and advise the state. No such commission exists. The bill would have created one to address inequities facing the Latino community in housing, education, economic mobility, labor and health care. It would have had nine members, three each appointed by the Governor, the Senate President pro Tempore and the Assembly Speaker, chosen for expertise in areas including housing, education, labor rights, public health, economic development, the environment, small business and K-12 students. The commission would have collected and analyzed data, developed recommendations, investigated low Latino union participation, worked with health agencies on access, and monitored how state programs affect the community. It would have held annual public forums and town halls and reported each year to the Governor and the Legislature. It would have been funded by legislative appropriations and outside grants, and would have ended in 2036. The commission would have advised and monitored. It could not have ordered any agency to act. The Senate passed it 32-8, but the governor vetoed it, so it did not become law.

September 10, 2025Supports Civil Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 766, which would have required state agencies to build racial equity into their strategic plans. Under current law only agencies for which strategic planning is recommended must write a plan and report each year to the Governor and the Joint Legislative Budget Committee. The bill would have applied that duty to every agency, department, office and commission under the Governor's authority. It would also have required each of them, where applicable and feasible, to develop or update the plan to reflect the use of data analysis and inclusive practices to advance racial equity. Plans would have had to respond to identified disparities with changes to the organization's policies, programs and operations. The requirement reached internal planning documents and annual reports. It set no hiring rules, quotas or funding conditions, and carried no penalty or deadline. The Senate passed it 30-9, but the governor vetoed it, so it did not become law.

September 10, 2025Supports Civil Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to agree to the Assembly's changes to Senate Bill 518, which sets up a Bureau for Descendants of American Slavery inside the state Civil Rights Department, run by a deputy director the governor appoints and the Senate confirms. A genealogy unit checks whether a person descends from enslaved Americans, and that finding is what qualifies someone for state benefits meant for descendants. The bureau also runs education, outreach, and legal units, and must follow rules on how it collects, stores, and shares personal and genetic information. None of it starts unless the Legislature sets aside money for it. The California State Senate agreed 30-10, sending the bill to the governor, and it became law.

September 10, 2025Supports Civil Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 29, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 82, which widens California's legal shield for gender-affirming care to match the one already covering abortion. Providers, staff and patients at reproductive health facilities who face threats may keep their home address out of public records, and the bill extends that to gender-affirming care providers, employees and volunteers. The ban on posting, selling or trading someone's personal information or image online with intent to incite violence now covers gender-affirming care providers, staff, volunteers and patients, and others living at the same address. Prescriptions for testosterone or mifepristone may no longer be reported to the state's controlled substance monitoring system, and existing records from before 2026 must be removed by January 1, 2027. Courts may not issue wiretap, pen register or search warrant orders to investigate any legally protected health care activity, not just abortion, and county bail schedules must set zero bail for such arrests. Police may not arrest someone over that care, agencies may not share information about it with other states, and courts may not issue subpoenas for out-of-state proceedings about it. The Attorney General may sue over a false sworn statement accompanying an out-of-state request, with a civil penalty of $15,000. The Senate passed it 29-8 and it became law.

September 9, 2025Supports Civil Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1525, which stops California from disciplining lawyers over out-of-state penalties tied to reproductive and gender-affirming care. The State Bar may discipline, suspend or disbar an attorney based on an out-of-state felony conviction or a misconduct finding elsewhere, and may refuse to admit an applicant on the same grounds. The bill creates a category called an excluded event, which cannot support discipline, cannot be required to be reported to the State Bar, cannot be used as evidence of misconduct in California, and cannot be a reason to deny admission. An excluded event means a civil judgment, judicial sanctions, a felony charge or conviction, a misdemeanor committed while practicing law, or discipline by a licensing body. It counts only where it rests on another state's law that interferes with someone's right to receive, provide, recommend, enable or advocate for sensitive services lawful in California. Sensitive services covers reproductive and gender-affirming health care, contraception and related care. The shield does not apply where the same conduct would expose the attorney to a similar claim under California law. The Senate passed it 30-10 and it became law.

September 9, 2025Supports Civil Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 642, which widens California's equal pay law and tightens what a posted pay range means. An employer may not pay someone less than employees of the opposite sex for substantially similar work, and larger employers must post a pay scale with job listings. The bill changes the comparison from the opposite sex to another sex, so it is no longer limited to a two-sex pairing. A pay scale becomes a good faith estimate of what the employer reasonably expects to pay upon hire, and the law now defines an applicant as someone not already working for that employer. The deadline to sue becomes a flat three years from the last date the violation occurs, replacing two years with three for willful cases. A worker may recover for the whole period a violation lasted, capped at six years. A violation is treated as occurring each time the pay practice is adopted, a worker becomes subject to it, or the worker is affected by it, including each affected paycheck. Wages are defined to include salary, overtime, bonuses, stock, profit sharing, insurance, vacation and other benefits. The Senate passed it 30-10 and it became law.

September 9, 2025Supports Civil Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 7, which would have let California colleges give an admissions preference to descendants of slavery. The state constitution bars public education from granting preferential treatment based on race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin. The bill would have said the California State University, the University of California, independent colleges and private postsecondary schools may consider giving an admissions preference to an applicant who is a descendant of slavery, so far as that does not conflict with federal law. A descendant of slavery would have meant a person who can show direct lineage to someone enslaved before 1900 under American chattel slavery and who meets listed criteria. Those include being emancipated by legal or other means, freed under gradual abolition laws or constitutional amendments, treated as a fugitive from bondage, or deemed contraband by military authorities. The bill would have granted permission rather than requiring any school to act, and it did not create a way to certify who qualifies. The Senate passed it 30-10, but the governor vetoed it, so it did not become law.

September 9, 2025Supports Civil Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 742, which would have required faster professional licensing for descendants of American slaves. The Department of Consumer Affairs holds the boards that license many trades and professions, and those boards must already speed up applications from the spouse or partner of an active-duty service member stationed in California. The bill would have added the same duty for an applicant who is a descendant of American slaves. That duty would only have begun once a process existed to certify who qualifies. The whole section depended on a separate bill passing to create a Bureau for Descendants of American Slavery, and it would have expired four years after taking effect, or at the start of 2032, whichever came first. The Senate passed it 30-9, but the governor vetoed it, so it did not become law.

September 9, 2025Supports Civil Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1249, which widens early in-person voting. A voter may cast their mail ballot at the elections official's office or a satellite location starting 29 days before election day. For a statewide election, a county that does not run an all-mail election must open at least one early voting site on the Saturday before election day, for at least six hours. At that site a voter can hand in a mail ballot, register to vote, cast a provisional ballot, or get a replacement ballot. The bill drops the rule that a ballot voted at a satellite location go into a voter identification envelope. It also drops the requirement that officials announce a satellite location through a general news release, and instead requires notice at least two weeks ahead. The Senate passed it 30-10 and it became law.

September 9, 2025Supports Civil Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 373, which makes a lawyer for an adult former foster youth follow that client's instructions. A person aged roughly 18 to 21 who stays in foster care as an adult is called a nonminor dependent, and the juvenile court appoints them a lawyer. State law now says a primary responsibility of that lawyer is to advocate for the protection, safety and physical and emotional wellbeing of the child or nonminor dependent. The bill removes nonminor dependents from that clause, so the duty applies only to children. The lawyer must now represent a nonminor dependent's wishes except where doing so conflicts with their protection or safety, and the bill deletes that exception. The lawyer is simply charged with representing the person's wishes. The existing backstop remains where a court finds a nonminor dependent is not competent to direct counsel. The Senate passed it 30-8 and it became law.

September 3, 2025Supports Civil Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 515, which requires cities and counties to use more detailed categories when recording the ancestry of people they hire. State agencies must already use additional categories for Black or African American groups when collecting ancestry data on state hires, and no such duty applies locally. From January 1, 2027 a city or county, including a charter city, collecting ancestry or ethnic origin data on people it hires must use those same categories. They separate African Americans descended from people enslaved in the United States from Black people who are not, including African, Caribbean and other Black groups, with an option not to identify. The stated purpose is more accurate data on employees descended from people enslaved and emancipated in the United States, to support policy planning and resource allocation. The duty applies only where such data is already collected. A city that collects none is not required to start. The Senate passed it 28-10 and it became law.

May 29, 2025Supports Civil Rights

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 327, which would stop electric and gas utilities from charging customers for fighting public takeovers of their service. Utilities already may not bill ratepayers for lobbying, campaign contributions, promotional advertising, charitable giving, fines and investor relations. The bill would add opposition to municipalization to that banned list, meaning efforts to stop a city or county from taking over electric or gas service as a public utility. That would cover lobbying, appearing at city council or county board meetings to oppose such efforts, and other activities meant to prevent a publicly owned utility being established, along with the research behind them. The bill would also let the Public Advocate's Office, the ratepayer advocate inside the utilities commission, compel information needed to support the commission's duties, not only its own. It would give that office the same power as the commission to review the accounts of any regulated company. The office's yearly staffing and spending report to the Legislature would move from January 10 to February 1. The Senate passed it 30-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 28, 2026Supports Corporate Accountability

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 2227, which would raise the bonds and penalties that apply to farm labor contractors. These contractors hire and supply farmworkers to growers and must be licensed by the Labor Commissioner. A penalty of $100 for each worker plus $100 for each day, capped at $10,000, now applies to operating without a license. The bill would extend it to licensed contractors and to violations across the whole chapter unless another penalty applies. A contractor must post a surety bond, a guarantee that pays workers if the contractor does not. The bond is now set by the size of the annual payroll, at $25,000, $50,000 or $75,000. The bill would set it by annual gross receipts instead and double the amounts to $50,000, $100,000 and $150,000. Because gross receipts are usually larger than payroll, more contractors would fall into the higher brackets. The Labor Commissioner would have to collect documentation of that figure, and would have to publish bond details on the public license database, including the bond number, dates, size and the surety company's contact information. A contractor would also have to tell a worker filing a claim that the bond exists and how to reach it. The Senate passed it 28-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 27, 2026Supports Corporate Accountability

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 909, which would raise the penalties for underpaying workers on public construction. Contractors on public works must pay the prevailing wage, and the penalties have not changed since 2012. The maximum penalty for underpaying would rise from $200 to $280 for each worker for each day. The minimums would rise from $40, $80 and $120 to $56, $112 and $168, the higher figures applying to a contractor with a violation in the past three years and to a willful violation. The penalty for failing to produce payroll records within ten days would rise from $100 to $140 for each worker for each day. Apprenticeship penalties would rise from $100 to $140 a day, and from $300 to $420 for a repeat violation. The ceiling on contractor registration fees would rise from $800 to $1,000. Penalty money would go into the state enforcement fund, which could pay for staffing the Labor Commissioner's public works enforcement. The existing power to reduce a penalty for a promptly corrected good faith mistake, or where it would be disproportionate, is unchanged. The Senate passed it 30-9. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 26, 2026Supports Corporate Accountability

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1629, which would require dental plans to pay an out-of-network dentist directly and tell patients the cost first. A dental plan or insurer may now send payment to the patient rather than to a dentist outside its network, even where the patient has assigned the benefit. The bill would require the plan to pay the non-contracting provider directly for covered services when the provider submits an assignment of benefits, and that includes a registered dental hygienist in alternative practice. The provider would first have to obtain the patient's signed and dated consent and keep a copy. Before taking that consent the provider would have to make six disclosures. The first three are that the provider is out of network, that a contracted dentist may cost less, and an estimate of the treatment cost and the patient's share. The rest are that plan benefits may not apply, that the patient may confirm coverage with the plan first, and that the assignment is optional and revocable. The provider could not charge the patient more than an estimate of their cost sharing before the plan pays. Failing any of those duties would become grounds for license discipline. Plans and insurers would also have to certify their network adequacy data under penalty of perjury, having counted everyone using the same provider network. The Senate passed it 30-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 26, 2026Supports Corporate Accountability

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1838, which would require contractors bidding on local public works to disclose their wage and hour violations. There is no general disclosure requirement today outside contracts with participation goals for minority, women or disabled veteran businesses. As a condition of bidding, a contractor would have to disclose in writing any federal, state or local wage and hour violation in the past five years, including unpaid wages, overtime, meal or rest break violations, and misclassifying employees as contractors. It would also have to supply documents showing each disclosed violation has been resolved, including court orders or final agency determinations and proof that fines, penalties or back wages were paid. Failing to disclose may lead to disqualification, and the local agency must set up a process letting a contractor appeal that. Only a final judgment or determination counts, and a contractor cannot be disqualified over a matter still under appeal if the amount is secured. Work covered by a project labor agreement is exempt, as is a project where the agency already requires the same disclosure at prequalification. The bill does not say that a disclosed violation is itself grounds to reject a bid. The Senate passed it 31-9. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 26, 2026Supports Corporate Accountability

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 1371, which would stop garbage companies from using a strike as a reason to halt service. Local governments sign franchise contracts for waste hauling, and those contracts often include a clause excusing a company from performing when something outside its control happens. For any waste hauling franchise, license or permit a local agency enters into or substantially amends from January 1, 2027, the bill would bar a clause excusing or suspending performance because of a work stoppage arising from a labor dispute. It would also make any such clause void and unenforceable, including in contracts already signed. Substantially amended would mean an agreed change to a majority of the material terms. The rules would be declared a matter of statewide concern, so they would reach charter cities as well. The Senate passed it 28-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 26, 2026Supports Corporate Accountability

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 1237, which would raise the penalty on employers that repeatedly fail to file a pay data report. Larger private employers must file a yearly report with the Civil Rights Department showing employee counts by race, ethnicity and sex, and within each job category the median and mean hourly pay for each group. A court must already impose up to $100 per employee for failing to file and up to $200 per employee for a later failure. The bill would raise that repeat penalty to up to $1,000 per employee, leaving the first-time penalty unchanged. It would also require the department to publish each year the total number of pay data reports it received. That count would still be subject to the existing rule that published figures be arranged so they cannot be traced to any individual business or person. The Senate passed it 30-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 26, 2026Supports Corporate Accountability

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1770, known as Lindalee's Law, which would put the Attorney General in charge of watching how health plans run forced arbitration. Many health plan contracts require a member to take a dispute to a private arbitrator instead of a court, and state law already sets disclosure rules for that. The bill would give the Attorney General oversight of whether plans follow those rules, the power to require reports from them, and a duty to tell the Department of Managed Health Care about any corrective action taken. It would also require an arbitration claim brought under a health plan to run under California's own arbitration law. It states that the Attorney General's other powers, including enforcing unfair competition law, and the department's existing authority are both left intact. The Senate passed it 30-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 26, 2026Supports Corporate Accountability

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 801, which would require regular checks that banks, credit unions and mortgage lenders are not discriminating. The Department of Financial Protection and Innovation oversees banks and credit unions and licenses mortgage lenders, and examines mortgage licensees at least once every four years, but no routine fair lending examination is required. The commissioner would have to examine the books of entities under banking and credit union law at least once every four years for compliance with the non-discrimination laws that apply to mortgage lending. The commissioner would issue written findings, give a copy to the entity's principals, officers or directors, and take appropriate steps to ensure any violations are corrected. That written statement could not be disclosed to anyone other than the entity, law enforcement, or other state or federal regulators for investigation and enforcement. The existing mortgage lender examination would also cover those non-discrimination laws. Breaking one of those laws would itself become a violation of the banking, credit union or mortgage lending law, and the commissioner could examine officers and employees under oath. The Senate passed it 30-8. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 25, 2026Supports Corporate Accountability

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 2495, which would widen the ban on using someone's immigration status against them at work. Employers may not now engage in, or direct someone else to engage in, an unfair immigration-related practice to retaliate against a worker for exercising a right under state labor law or a local ordinance. The bill would extend that to any right under a local, state or federal law or regulation applying to employees. It would also bar preventing a person from exercising such a right in the first place, not only retaliating afterwards. It would add a catch-all barring other conduct related to a person's perceived immigration status that would reasonably tend to discourage them from doing something they have a legal right to do, or push them into something they have a right to refuse. That reaches conduct aimed at someone the employer believes is an immigrant, whether or not that is so. A civil penalty of up to $10,000 for each employee for each violation would be added, on top of the existing right to sue. The Senate passed it 30-8. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 25, 2026Supports Corporate Accountability

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 2599, which would require large long-established companies to search their records for historical ties to slavery. A separate existing law already makes big retailers and manufacturers disclose efforts against forced labor in their present-day supply chains. This bill looks backwards instead. A business operating in California that existed, or whose predecessor existed, on or before December 31, 1964, and takes in more than $100 million worldwide, would have to file a sworn affidavit. The affidavit would verify that the company searched all records held by it and its related entities for evidence of five things. Those are buying or selling enslaved people, using them as collateral, lending money to buy them, insuring such transactions or the people themselves, and providing services that facilitated them. The Civil Rights Department would build a public online platform hosting the affidavits and records within a year of being funded. A covered business bidding on a state contract worth $100,000 or more would also have to certify under penalty of perjury that it filed the affidavit. None of it applies unless the Legislature appropriates money for it. The Senate passed it 30-9. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 25, 2026Supports Corporate Accountability

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1758, which would raise the yearly fee travel sellers pay into a fund that repays their defrauded customers. Travel sellers register each year with the Attorney General, and the Travel Consumer Restitution Corporation may charge each one up to $35 a year for its operating fund. The bill would lift that ceiling to $60, and to $70 starting January 1, 2031. It would also let the corporation raise its own ceiling once a fiscal year, by no more than the rise in the California Consumer Price Index. Because it increases a charge it counts as raising a tax and needs a two-thirds vote in both houses. The Senate passed it 28-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 20, 2026Supports Corporate Accountability

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 177, the Fair Share from Big Corporations Act, which orders the state to draw up options for billing large employers whose workers rely on Medi-Cal. Medi-Cal is the state health program for low-income Californians, and some people enrolled in it work for large companies that do not offer them health coverage. The bill requires the Department of Finance, by March 1, 2027, to give the Joint Legislative Budget Committee one or more options for holding the state's largest corporations accountable for the taxpayer cost of those employees. At least one option must include a premium paid by employers with 250 or more employees to offset the cost of their workers on Medi-Cal who are not offered employer coverage. Each option must include state data estimating how many workers at the largest corporations are enrolled, draft legislative language, and an analysis of cost and timing. The requirement falls away if Congress repeals the Medicaid provisions of the federal law enacted in July 2025 before that date. The bill appropriates $10,000 and charges no employer anything. It requires a report, not a payment. The Senate passed it 29-9 and it became law.

June 29, 2026Supports Corporate Accountability

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 1406, which would close a use-tax dodge for expensive cars, boats and planes bought through out-of-state shell companies. California presumes that a vehicle, vessel or aircraft bought outside the state and brought in within 12 months was bought for use here and owes use tax, if certain conditions are met, one being that the buyer is a California resident. A closely held corporation or limited liability company already counts as a resident when Californians hold half or more of it, and the bill would add partnerships of all three kinds to that test. A shell company would count as a California resident if any single owner is a California resident, with no half-ownership threshold. A shell company would mean such a business used to evade taxes, with signs including no specific business purpose, no physical location outside California, no employees receiving federal wage forms, and no tax returns filed in another state. Any officer, manager, partner, owner or member of a shell company could be held personally liable for the unpaid tax, interest and penalties, despite the usual corporate liability shield. The changes would not reach a purchase or binding contract made on or before the operative date, and a deficiency notice would have to issue within three years. Because it raises a tax it needs a two-thirds vote in both houses. The Senate passed it 31-8. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

May 19, 2026Supports Corporate Accountability

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 703, which would have required trucking companies at two ports to disclose how they classify their drivers. California presumes a worker is an employee unless the hiring business proves otherwise, and the ports collect no standard classification data. A trucking company serving the Port of Long Beach or the Port of Los Angeles would have had to file three things each year. Those are a workers' compensation policy covering its employee drivers, the number covered, and a sworn statement that it withholds all required taxes from the wages of any driver who is an employee. A driver who is not an employee would have filed proof of insurance and their federal, state and carrier registration numbers. From January 2027 the ports would have published that information, and quarterly details of every truck entering, including the owner, the authority used for entry and the named insured. A company replacing more than half its employees with contractors would have had 30 days to tell the port, with a $5,000 penalty for failing and $20,000 for false information. The rules would have applied to those two ports only. The Senate passed it 29-8, but the governor vetoed it, so it did not become law.

September 13, 2025Supports Corporate Accountability

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to agree to the Assembly's changes to Senate Bill 53, the Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act. It applies to companies training the largest AI models, those built with more than 10 to the 26th power computing operations, and its heaviest duties fall on developers with over $500 million in yearly revenue. Those companies must publish a safety framework explaining how they handle catastrophic risk, and send the Office of Emergency Services summaries of their internal risk assessments. That office must run a channel for reporting serious safety incidents, open to companies and the public. Employees who report a serious danger to public safety are protected from retaliation, and large developers must offer an anonymous internal channel for such reports. Incident reports and risk assessments sent to that office are closed to public records requests. The Attorney General may seek penalties of up to $1 million per violation. The act also bars cities and counties from writing their own rules on catastrophic AI risk, and sets up a consortium to plan a public computing cluster if the Legislature funds it. The Senate agreed 29-8 and it became law.

September 13, 2025Supports Corporate Accountability

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 31, 2026

Voted to agree to the Assembly's changes to Senate Bill 763, which raises the top fines for illegal deals that restrain trade under California's antitrust law. A company can now be fined up to $6 million, up from $1 million, and a person up to $1 million, up from $250,000, or more if the court ties the fine to the money made or the losses caused. The law also adds a penalty of up to $1 million for each violation, which the Attorney General or a district attorney can seek in a civil case. The California State Senate agreed 29-8, sending the bill to the governor, and it became law.

September 13, 2025Supports Corporate Accountability

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 29, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 963, which would have required property owners and developers to hand over public works records on request. Contractors on public works must keep certified payroll records, but the duty does not reach the owner or developer of the project. An owner or developer would have had to provide bid requests and lists, final contracts, contractor and subcontractor names and license numbers, certified payrolls they hold, and monthly workforce training reports. Those records would go to the state labor enforcement division, to jointly run union and employer benefit funds, and to joint labor-management committees. The owner would have had 30 days to comply, and 10 days after a follow-up request from the division. Penalties would have run at $100 for each worker for each day for payroll records and $500 a day for other records. A request would have had to come within three years of the work finishing, and the rules would not have applied to the state or its political subdivisions. The Senate passed it 29-8, but the governor vetoed it, so it did not become law.

September 12, 2025Supports Corporate Accountability

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 24, which would have barred utilities from charging customers for fighting public takeover of their service. A regulated utility may already not use ratepayer money for political advocacy that does not benefit ratepayers. The bill would have barred an electric or gas utility from recovering from ratepayers any direct or indirect cost of opposing municipalization, meaning a city or county taking over service as a publicly owned utility. That covered lobbying, appearing at city council or county board meetings, and other activities meant to undermine or prevent a publicly owned utility. Moving an expense to a different account after booking it would not have shielded it from disclosure to the commission or in a rate case. The commission would have had to monitor and investigate compliance. Payments made under federal labor-management agreements could still have been charged to ratepayers, and advocacy before regulators about the utility's own operations remained excluded. The bill would also have given the Public Advocate's Office the same power as the commission to review the accounts of any public utility. The Senate passed it 29-9, but the governor vetoed it, so it did not become law.

September 12, 2025Supports Corporate Accountability

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 7, which would have set rules for employers using automated systems to manage, discipline and fire workers. An automated decision system means a computer process using machine learning, statistical modeling, data analytics or artificial intelligence that produces a score, classification or recommendation used in place of or alongside human judgment. There is no general state law today requiring private employers to disclose or limit these systems. An employer would have had to give written notice to affected workers at least 30 days before using one. That notice would have listed the decisions it touches, the worker data used and its sources, any settings known to skew results, who built it, any quota it sets, and the worker's right to see and correct their data. Job applicants would have had to be told that hiring uses such a system. An employer could not have used one to break employment or civil rights law, to infer a worker's protected characteristics, or to punish a worker for exercising legal rights. An employer could not have relied solely on such a system to discipline, fire or deactivate a worker, and could not have used customer ratings as the main input. Workers could have requested their own data once a year. Employers under a union contract that expressly waives these rules would have been exempt, and the penalty was $500. The Senate passed it 28-9, but the governor vetoed it, so it did not become law.

September 12, 2025Supports Corporate Accountability

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 36, which would have widened what counts as illegal price gouging after a disaster and given consumers a way to sue over it. For 30 days after an emergency is declared, or 180 days for repair and reconstruction work, it is already a misdemeanor to raise prices on listed goods and services by more than 10 percent. The bill would not have changed that cap or those periods. It would have added price gouging to the list of deceptive practices consumers can sue over under the Consumers Legal Remedies Act, which today is enforceable only as a crime. It would have added a civil penalty of up to $2,500 for each act of unfair competition committed against someone displaced by an emergency, and allowed courts to treble penalties for that group as they already may for seniors, disabled people and veterans. Housing listing platforms would have had to remove a listing when law enforcement reported it as gouging, publish policies for landlords and renters, provide a way to report suspected violations, and give police a channel for warrants. Rent protection would have reached leases of any length rather than only those of a year or less. The bill would also have removed the Legislature from the bodies that may extend these protections, while letting it end an extension the Governor made. The Senate passed it 30-8, but the governor vetoed it, so it did not become law.

September 11, 2025Supports Corporate Accountability

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to agree to the Assembly's changes to Senate Bill 771, which would have made social media companies with over $100 million in yearly gross revenue pay penalties when their recommendation systems break California's civil rights laws. Those laws bar intimidation and violence aimed at people for who they are. A platform would have been liable where its algorithms relayed the offending content, or where it helped, encouraged or acted together with a violator. Penalties would have reached $1 million for a deliberate violation and $500,000 for a reckless one, and double that if the platform knew or should have known the victim was a minor. Companies could not have contracted their way out. It was to start on January 1, 2027. The Senate agreed 30-8, but the governor vetoed it, so it did not become law.

September 11, 2025Supports Corporate Accountability

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 31, 2026

Voted to agree to the Assembly's changes to Senate Bill 766, the California Combating Auto Retail Scams Act. Car dealers may not misrepresent material facts about a sale, including the cost or terms of buying, financing or leasing, whether a vehicle is actually available at an advertised price, and what a buyer can do if the dealer will not honor that price. Dealers must state the total price and any add-on products clearly, and may not charge for an add-on the buyer would get no benefit from. The old cancellation-option agreement for used cars is repealed. In its place, a dealer selling or leasing a used vehicle priced at $50,000 or less must give the buyer a three-day right to cancel. That right is lost once the car has been driven more than 400 miles, and the dealer may charge a restocking fee. Used cars sold at auction are outside the disclosure rule. Dealers must keep compliance records for two years. The rules start on October 1, 2026. The Senate agreed 30-8 and it became law.

September 11, 2025Supports Corporate Accountability

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 31, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 325, which makes it easier to bring a price-fixing case under California's antitrust law. A complaint can go forward if the facts it sets out make a conspiracy to restrain trade plausible, and it no longer has to rule out the chance the companies acted on their own. The law also bars using or handing out a shared pricing algorithm as part of such a conspiracy, or pressuring another business into charging the price the algorithm suggests. It passed the California State Senate 29-9 and became law.

September 11, 2025Supports Corporate Accountability

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 27, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 538, which makes it easier for the public to obtain contractor payroll records on government construction jobs. Contractors and subcontractors on public works must keep payroll records showing each worker's classification, hours and actual wages paid, and certified copies must be available to the public on request. Where a member of the public asks the agency that awarded the contract and that agency does not hold the records, the bill requires it to obtain them from the contractor and provide them. The contractor would have ten days to comply after receiving a written request. The Division of Labor Standards Enforcement could enforce penalties where the contractor misses that deadline, and the existing forfeit is $100 for each worker for each day. Failing to keep accurate payroll records is already a misdemeanor, so adding duties widens what can be charged. The existing rule that social security numbers and addresses are removed from public copies is unchanged. The Senate passed it 30-9 and it became law.

September 10, 2025Supports Corporate Accountability

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to agree to the Assembly's changes to Senate Bill 464, which tightens California's employer pay data reporting. Employers with 100 or more workers already report pay by race, ethnicity and sex. The bill requires the demographic information gathered for that report to be stored separately from personnel files, and from January 1, 2027, raises the number of job categories reported from 10 to 23. Where the Civil Rights Department asks a court to penalize an employer that failed to file, the court must impose the penalty rather than merely being allowed to. The Senate agreed 30-10 and it became law.

September 10, 2025Supports Corporate Accountability

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 31, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1362, which extends California's registration rules for foreign labor recruiters to the people who recruit farmworkers from abroad. Recruiters who bring in workers on H-2B visas for non-farm jobs were already covered; from July 1, 2027 the rules also cover recruiting agricultural workers on H-2A visas. Those recruiters must register with the Labor Commissioner and disclose who has a financial interest in the business. It passed the California State Senate 30-8 and became law.

September 10, 2025Supports Corporate Accountability

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 30, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 858, which keeps a job recall law running until January 1, 2027. It covers hotels, private clubs, event centers, airport food and service companies, and the firms that clean and maintain office and retail buildings. Those employers must tell workers they laid off about openings the workers are qualified for, and offer the jobs in an order of preference. It protects workers with at least six months on the job who were laid off for reasons tied to the COVID-19 pandemic, and bars punishing a worker for claiming these rights. It passed the California State Senate 29-10 and became law.

September 10, 2025Supports Corporate Accountability

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 29, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 692, which bars employers from making a worker sign a contract, from January 1, 2026 on, that leaves the worker owing money if the job ends. These stay-or-pay deals can require paying back an employer, a training company, or a debt collector. Some are still allowed: government loan-repayment programs, tuition for a credential the worker can take to another job, approved apprenticeships, certain signing bonuses, and contracts to rent or buy a home. A banned term counts as an illegal restraint on a person's right to work, and a worker can sue over it, for themselves or for others in the same position, and collect penalties. It passed the California State Senate 25-11 and became law.

September 10, 2025Supports Corporate Accountability

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 27, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 723, which requires real estate listings to disclose when a photograph has been digitally altered. Brokers and salespeople are licensed under the Real Estate Law, and a willful violation of that law is a crime. Nothing previously addressed edited listing photos. A licensee who uses a digitally altered image in advertising for a property sale must include a statement that the image was altered and a link, web address or QR code leading to the original unaltered image. That disclosure must be reasonably conspicuous and placed on or next to the image. Where the images appear on a website the licensee controls, the unaltered versions must be included in the posting. A digitally altered image means one changed through photo editing software or artificial intelligence to add, remove or change elements such as fixtures, furniture, flooring, paint color, landscaping or the facade. Ordinary adjustments to lighting, sharpening, color, cropping or exposure are excluded where they do not change how the property is represented. The Senate passed it 29-10 and it became law.

September 9, 2025Supports Corporate Accountability

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 1340, which lets California rideshare drivers pick one statewide organization to bargain for them. The Public Employment Relations Board certifies it once 30 percent of active drivers sign authorizations, holding an election if no majority signs. The large rideshare companies, together covering 95 percent of rides, must then bargain in good faith over a single industry-wide agreement on pay, benefits and working conditions, including deactivations. If talks stall, mediation and then arbitration follow, though an arbitrator can impose terms only on a listed set of subjects. Any agreement takes effect only if the board approves it. No agreement may change drivers' independent-contractor status under Proposition 22, which the voters passed in 2020. It passed the California State Senate 29-10 and became law.

September 8, 2025Supports Corporate Accountability

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 30, 2026

Voted to pass Assembly Bill 931, which regulates consumer legal funding, where a company advances a person money in exchange for the right to collect a set amount out of whatever their lawsuit later pays. The contract must be in writing, state what the consumer receives with an itemized list of charges and a repayment schedule, and be provided in the language it was negotiated in. The consumer may cancel within five business days of getting the money by returning it in full. The company must have no say in whether, when, or for how much the claim settles, and it may not pay referral fees to attorneys. What it is owed is fixed in advance by how long the case runs, never as a percentage of the winnings, and the charges may not run beyond 36 months from the funding date. A company that breaks these rules faces automatic termination of the contract, damages of up to $10,000 per violation or three times the consumer's actual losses, the consumer's legal costs, and court orders to stop. Attorneys are separately barred from promising or giving anything of value to someone for recommending or securing their services, apart from listed exceptions. Another part of the law bars California attorneys from sharing legal fees with out-of-state legal businesses that allow non-attorney ownership or control, for contracts made from 2026 through the end of 2029. Sharing is allowed only when the attorney is licensed in that state, the fees are for work there, and that state's rules govern. Breaking the fee-sharing rule invites State Bar discipline and damages of $10,000 per violation or three times the consumer's actual losses, whichever is greater; nonprofits are not covered by it. It passed the California State Senate 29-10 and became law.

September 4, 2025Supports Corporate Accountability

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 30, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 825, which confirms that California's financial protection regulator can act against state-licensed financial businesses that deceive or take advantage of customers. Escrow agents, finance lenders and brokers, broker-dealers, investment advisers, mortgage lenders and servicers, check sellers and other licensees are otherwise exempt from the state's consumer financial protection law. The bill makes clear that the exemption does not shield any of them from the ban on deceptive and abusive practices. It passed the California State Senate 28-10 and became law.

June 3, 2025Supports Corporate Accountability

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 29, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 82, which stops the fine print in a consumer contract from reaching disputes that have nothing to do with that contract. Its terms for settling disputes can cover only arguments about the product, service, money, or credit the contract itself provides. A clause signing away that protection has no force, and courts must read the rule in the consumer's favor. The law adds to other consumer protections rather than replacing them. It passed the California State Senate 28-10 and became law.

June 2, 2025Supports Corporate Accountability

Source: legiscan.com · researched August 29, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 513, which gives workers the right to see and copy their own training records. Current and former employees may already inspect personnel records relating to their performance or to a grievance. The bill states that those performance records include education and training records. An employer that keeps such records must ensure they show the employee's name, the training provider, the duration and date of the training, the core competencies covered including equipment or software skills, and any resulting certification or qualification. Because breaking the personnel records rules is already a crime, widening what those rules cover widens that offense. The content requirements apply to an employer that keeps training records. The bill does not order an employer keeping none to start. The Senate passed it 29-9 and it became law.

May 28, 2025Supports Corporate Accountability

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 1425, which would create criminal and civil penalties for interfering with high-speed rail land. The High-Speed Rail Authority can already buy or condemn the strip of land the trains run on, but there is no permit system for building on it. The bill would create a permit program run by the authority for encroachments on that operating right-of-way. Installing or carrying out an encroachment there without a permit would become a misdemeanor, subject to exceptions the bill sets out. Willfully damaging any part of the rail system or the right-of-way would be a separate misdemeanor. Certain categories of encroachment would also carry civil penalties, and managing water flows in ways that affect the system or the right-of-way would be unlawful without a permit or other legal authority. The authority or the Attorney General could sue to collect those penalties. Permit fees and penalties would go into the High-Speed Rail Property Fund, with penalty money spent on the rail system and fee money on running the permit program once appropriated. The Senate passed it 29-9. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 26, 2026Supports Public Infrastructure

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026

Voted to pass Senate Bill 1196, which would set deadlines for utilities to connect small customers to the electricity grid. State law already requires the Public Utilities Commission to set target times for energizing customers, meaning hooking them up or upgrading their capacity. The bill would define a small energization project as one needing no distribution or service line extension or upgrade, or needing only a new meter. By September 30, 2027 the commission would have to set timelines for utilities to respond to and process those requests. It would set when an application counts as complete and when the utility must say so, require a list of deficiencies and how to fix them for incomplete applications, and determine penalties for missing the deadlines. Utilities would have to let people apply at the same time as a local building permit, and could not cancel an application without consent unless the applicant goes silent. They would have to allow a mutually agreed extension, offer an optional pre-application review, and give cost estimates covering all related fees and potential upgrades. The Senate passed it 30-10. The bill has passed the Legislature and is awaiting the governor's decision.

August 18, 2026Supports Public Infrastructure

Source: legiscan.com · researched September 2, 2026