Asm. Liz Ortega

Existing law, the Child Abuse and Neglect Reporting Act, requires certain persons specified as "mandated reporters" to report suspected child abuse or child neglect, as specified. The act provides that a positive toxicology screen at the time of the delivery of an infant is not in and of itself a sufficient basis for reporting child abuse or neglect but requires an indication of maternal substance abuse to lead to an assessment of the needs of the mother and child pursuant to a specified provision of law, and, if other factors are present that indicate risk to a child, a report is required to be made, as specified. Existing law requires each county to establish protocols between county health departments, county welfare departments, and public and private hospitals in the county, regarding the application and use of a needs assessment of, and a referral for, certain substance-exposed infants to a county welfare department. Existing law requires a clinic, health facility, home health agency, or hospice to prevent unlawful or unauthorized access to, and use or disclosure of, patients' medical information, as defined. Existing law authorizes a health care provider to disclose medical information to a county social worker, probation officer, foster care public health nurse, or any other person authorized to have custody or care of a minor for purposes of coordinating health care services and medical treatment. Existing law authorizes those individuals to receive medical information and protected health information, as specified. A violation of these provisions may be punished as a misdemeanor. Existing law exempts specific medical and mental health evidence from a civil proceeding, including medical-dental staff committee findings and recommendations, as specified, or that a person suffered or experienced excited delirium. This bill would prohibit the releasing, reporting, or providing of a perinatal person's or a newborn's drug test or alcohol test or screen results, or information about drug or alcohol use in a pregnant or perinatal person's or newborn's medical records or otherwise known to a medical provider, as specified. The bill would also require a licensed clinic, health facility, home health agency, or hospice to prevent unlawful or unauthorized access to, and use or disclosure of, among other information, a perinatal person's or newborn's drug test or alcohol test or screen results. This bill would prohibit the admission of those results or information in a civil proceeding. By expanding the scope of an existing crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law establishes independent institutions of higher education as one of the segments of postsecondary education in the state. Existing law, the Cal Grant Program, establishes the Cal Grant A Entitlement Awards, the Cal Grant B Entitlement Awards, the California Community College Expanded Entitlement Awards, the California Community College Transfer Entitlement Awards, the Competitive Cal Grant A and B Awards, the Cal Grant C Awards, and the Cal Grant T Awards under the administration of the Student Aid Commission. The Cal Grant Reform Act revises and recasts the provisions establishing and governing the existing Cal Grant Program into a new Cal Grant Program. Existing law specifies that the act becomes operative only if General Fund moneys over the multiyear forecasts beginning in the 2024–25 fiscal year are available to support ongoing augmentations and actions, and if funding is provided in the annual Budget Act to implement the act. This bill would prohibit, commencing September 1, 2025, an independent institution of higher education, as defined, from providing a legacy preference or donor preference in admissions, as defined, to an applicant as part of the regular or early action admissions process. The bill would require, on or before June 30, 2026, and annually thereafter, an independent institution of higher education to report to the Legislature and the Department of Justice on whether it is in compliance or violation of these provisions, and if in violation of these provisions, to also report, for that academic year, (1) specified information about newly enrolled students and (2) the admission rate of students who are provided a legacy preference or donor preference in admissions, as compared to the admission rate of students who are not provided a legacy preference or donor preference in admissions. The bill would require the department to post the names of the independent institutions of higher education that violate the prohibition on its internet website by the next fiscal year.

Existing law, subject to specified requirements for the employee, prohibits an employer from discharging or in any manner discriminating against an employee because of the employee's status as a victim of crime or abuse or for taking time off for specified purposes. Those purposes include serving on a jury, and, if the employee is a victim of a crime, appearing in court as a witness in any judicial proceeding, and obtaining or attempting to obtain prescribed relief. Existing law requires an employer to provide reasonable accommodations for a victim of domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking, who requests an accommodation for the safety of the victim while at work. Existing law requires reinstatement and reimbursement for discrimination or retaliation, as prescribed. Existing law makes an employer who willfully refuses to rehire, promote, or otherwise restore an employee or former employee who has been determined to be eligible for rehiring or promotion by a grievance procedure or hearing authorized by law guilty of a misdemeanor. Existing law authorizes an employee who is discriminated or retaliated against because the employee has exercised these rights to file a complaint with the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement of the Department of Industrial Relations. Existing law defines terms for these purposes. Existing law, subject to specified requirements for the employee, also prohibits an employer with 25 or more employees from discharging, or in any manner discriminating or retaliating against, an employee who is a victim, for taking time off from work to seek medical attention for injuries caused by crime or abuse, to obtain certain services as a result of the crime or abuse or related to an experience of crime or abuse, or to participate in safety planning and take other actions to increase safety from future crime or abuse. Existing law requires reinstatement and reimbursement for discrimination or retaliation, as prescribed. Existing law makes an employer who willfully refuses to rehire, promote, or otherwise restore an employee or former employee who has been determined to be eligible for rehiring or promotion by a grievance procedure or hearing authorized by law guilty of a misdemeanor. Existing law authorizes an employee who is discriminated or retaliated against because the employee has exercised these rights to file a complaint with the division. Existing law defines terms for these purposes. Existing law requires an employer to inform each employee of the victim rights above in writing, to be provided upon hire and to other employees upon request. Existing law requires the Labor Commissioner to develop and post a form that an employer may use to comply, as prescribed. This bill would revise and recast the jury, court, and victim time off provisions for employees as unlawful employment practices within the California Fair Employment and Housing Act and, thus, within the enforcement authority of the Civil Rights Department. The bill would refer to a "qualifying act of violence," as defined, instead of crime, or crime or abuse. The bill would substantially revise existing definitions for its purposes, including defining "victim" as an individual against whom a qualifying act of violence is committed. The bill would prohibit an employer with 25 or more employees from discharging or in any manner discriminating or retaliating against an employee who is a victim or who has a family member who is a victim for taking time off work for any of a number of additional prescribed purposes relating to a qualifying act of violence. The bill would permit an employer to limit the total leave taken pursuant to these provisions, as specified, and require that the leave taken by an employee pursuant to these provisions run concurrently with leave taken pursuant to the federal Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 and the California Family Rights Act if the employee would have been eligible for that leave. The bill would expand the eligibility for reasonable accommodations to include an employee who is a victim or whose family member is a victim of a qualifying act of violence for the safety of the employee while at work. The bill would omit the reinstatement and reimbursement provisions included in existing law. The bill would require an employer to inform each employee of their rights under the bill, to be provided to new employees upon hire, to all employees annually, at any time upon request, and any time an employee informs an employer that the employee or the employee's family member is a victim. The bill would require the department to develop and post, on or before July 1, 2025, a form, as prescribed, that an employer may use to comply with that requirement. The bill would make a number of conforming changes to implement these provisions. Existing law, the Healthy Workplaces, Healthy Families Act of 2014, requires an employer to provide a specified employee who is a victim of domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking with paid sick days for the above-described purposes for which existing law prohibits an employer from discharging, or in any manner discriminating or retaliating against, the employee, as specified. This bill would expand this paid sick leave requirement to include the additional purposes for which the bill would prohibit an employer from discharging, or in any manner discriminating or retaliating against, the employee, as specified. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 48205 of the Education Code proposed by AB 1884 and SB 1138 to be operative only if this bill and either or both of those bills are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 246.5 of the Labor Code proposed by SB 1105 to be operative only if this bill and SB 1105 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.

Existing law generally regulates a social media platform, including by requiring a social media platform to clearly and conspicuously state whether it has a mechanism for reporting violent posts that is available to users and nonusers of the social media platform and to include a link to that reporting mechanism, as prescribed. This bill would require a social media platform to maintain a law enforcement contact process that, among other things, makes available a staffed hotline for law enforcement personnel for purposes of receiving, and responding to, requests for information. The bill would, except as prescribed, also require a social media platform to comply with a search warrant within 72 hours if the search warrant is provided to the social media platform by a law enforcement agency, the subject of the search warrant is information associated with an account on the social media platform, and that information is controlled by a user of the social media platform. This bill would not apply to a social media platform with fewer than 1,000,000 discrete monthly users and would make its provisions operative on July 1, 2025.

Under existing law, in any civil action that contains allegations of sexual harassment, sexual assault, or sexual battery, opinion evidence, reputation evidence, and evidence of specific instances of a plaintiff's sexual conduct with someone other than the alleged perpetrator, is not admissible by the defendant in order to prove consent by the plaintiff or the absence of injury to the plaintiff. This bill would also make the specified types of evidence inadmissible in such civil actions when being used to attack the credibility of the plaintiff's testimony on consent or absence of injury. Under existing law, in any sexual battery civil action involving a minor and an adult who is in a position of authority, as specified, evidence of the plaintiff minor's sexual conduct with the defendant adult is not admissible to prove consent by the plaintiff or the absence of injury to the plaintiff. Existing law authorizes evidence of the minor plaintiff's sexual conduct to be introduced only to attack the credibility of the plaintiff or to prove something other than consent by the plaintiff if, upon a hearing of the court out of the presence of the jury, the defendant proves that the probative value of that evidence outweighs the prejudice to the plaintiff, as specified. This bill would remove the requirement, in cases involving a minor and an adult who is in a position of authority, that prior to the introduction of specified types of evidence, a court hold a hearing out of the presence of the jury, where the defendant bears the burden to prove that the probative value of the evidence outweighs the prejudice. The introduction of evidence relating to the sexual conduct of the minor in such cases would be evaluated under procedures already in place under existing law.

Existing law establishes the licensure and regulation of health facilities by the State Department of Public Health, including, among others, general acute care hospitals. A violation of these provisions is a crime. Under existing law, a general acute care hospital is required to provide certain basic services, including medical, nursing, surgical, anesthesia, laboratory, radiology, pharmacy, and dietary services. Existing law authorizes a general acute care hospital to provide various special or supplemental services if certain conditions are met. Existing regulations define a supplemental service as an organized inpatient or outpatient service that is not required to be provided by law or regulation. Existing law requires a health facility to provide 90 days of public notice, with specified requirements, of the proposed closure or elimination of a supplemental service, such as maternity services. This bill would require an acute care hospital that operates a perinatal unit and expects challenges in the next 6 months that may result in a reduction or loss of perinatal services, to report specified information to the Department of Health Care Access and Information, including, but not limited to, the number of medical staff and employees working in the perinatal unit and the hospital's prior performance on financial metrics. The bill would require the Department of Health Care Access and Information to forward the provided information to the State Department of Health Care Services and the State Department of Public Health. The bill would require this information to be kept confidential to the extent permitted by law. The bill would require, within 3 months of receiving this notice from the hospital, the Department of Health Care Access and Information, in conjunction with the State Department of Public Health and the State Department of Health Care Services, to conduct a community impact assessment to identify the 3 closest hospitals operating a perinatal unit, their distance from the challenged facility, and whether those hospitals have any restrictions on their reproductive health services. The bill would require the Department of Health Care Access and Information to provide the community impact assessment to specified entities and would require these entities to keep the community impact assessment confidential. If the hospital plans to close its perinatal unit, the bill would require the hospital to provide public notice of the proposed closure, including the results of the community impact assessment, and other specified information on the hospital's internet website 90 days in advance of the closure. The bill would require the public to be permitted to comment on the closure for 60 days after the notice is given, and would require one noticed public hearing be conducted by the hospital. The bill would also require the hospital to accept written public comment. By creating a new crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law requires the Governor to appoint every officer whose mode of appointment is not prescribed by law. Existing law also prescribes the manner of the Governor's appointment of those officers. This bill would require the office of the Governor, commencing January 1, 2026, to maintain on its internet website a list of every state board and commission that includes, for each state board or commission, the membership list, stated purpose, duties, meeting frequency, internet website, and vacancies in the membership. The bill would require the office of the Governor, on or before January 1, 2027, and annually thereafter, to create and publish on its internet website a report containing aggregate demographic information of appointments made by the office during the prior calendar year, as specified.

Existing law authorizes a public or private elementary or secondary school to determine whether or not to make emergency naloxone hydrochloride or another opioid antagonist and trained personnel available at its school, and to designate one or more volunteers to receive related training to address an opioid overdose, as specified. Existing law prohibits a person who has completed that training and who administers, in good faith and not for compensation, naloxone hydrochloride or another opioid antagonist to a person who appears to be experiencing an opioid overdose from being subject to professional review, liable in a civil action, or subject to criminal prosecution for the person's acts or omissions in administering the naloxone hydrochloride or another opioid antagonist, unless the person's acts or omissions constituted gross negligence or willful and wanton misconduct, as provided. This bill would prohibit a school district, county office of education, or charter school from prohibiting a pupil 12 years of age or older, while on a schoolsite or participating in school activities, from carrying or administering, for the purposes of providing emergency treatment to persons who are suffering, or reasonably believed to be suffering, from an opioid overdose, a naloxone hydrochloride nasal spray or any other opioid overdose reversal medication that is federally approved for over-the-counter, nonprescription use, as provided. The bill would prohibit a pupil 12 years of age or older of those local educational agencies who administers those opioid antagonists on a schoolsite or while participating in school activities to a person who appears to be experiencing an opioid overdose, from being held liable in a civil action or being subject to criminal prosecution for their acts or omissions, unless the pupil's acts or omissions constitute gross negligence or willful and wanton misconduct, as provided. The bill would also prohibit those local educational agencies, or an employee of those local educational agencies, from being subject to professional review, liable in a civil action, or subject to criminal prosecution for a pupil's acts or omissions in administering those opioid antagonists, unless an act or omission of the local educational agency, or the employee of the local educational agency, constitutes gross negligence or willful and wanton misconduct connected to the administration of those opioid antagonists.

Existing law establishes, within the state disability insurance program, a family temporary disability insurance program, also known as the paid family leave program, for the provision of wage replacement benefits to workers who take time off work to care for certain seriously ill family members, to bond with a minor child within one year of birth or placement, as specified, or to participate in a qualifying exigency related to the covered active duty or call to covered active duty of certain family members. Existing law authorizes an employer to require an employee to take up to 2 weeks of earned but unused vacation before, and as a condition of, the employee's initial receipt of these benefits during any 12-month period in which the employee is eligible for these benefits. This bill would make that authorization and related provisions inapplicable to any disability commencing on or after January 1, 2025. The bill would also make nonsubstantive changes.

Existing law requires the governing board of any school district to give diligent care to the health and physical development of pupils. Existing law authorizes a school district, county office of education, and charter school to provide emergency naloxone hydrochloride or another opioid antagonist to school nurses or trained personnel who have volunteered, and authorizes school nurses or trained personnel to use naloxone hydrochloride or another opioid antagonist to provide emergency medical aid to persons suffering, or reasonably believed to be suffering, from an opioid overdose, as provided. This bill would prohibit school districts, county offices of education, and charter schools from prohibiting pupils in middle schools, junior high schools, high schools, or adult schools, while on a schoolsite or participating in school activities, from carrying fentanyl test strips or a federally approved opioid antagonist, as provided, for the emergency treatment of persons suffering, or reasonably believed to be suffering, from an opioid overdose.