Existing law establishes the California Community Colleges, under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, the California State University, under the administration of the Trustees of the California State University, and the University of California, under the administration of the Regents of the University of California, as the 3 segments of public postsecondary education in the state. Existing law requires, on and after January 1, 2023, a student health center on a California State University or University of California campus to offer abortion by medication techniques, as specified. Existing law establishes the College Student Health Center Sexual and Reproductive Health Preparation Fund to be administered by the Commission on the Status of Women and Girls and continuously appropriates the moneys in that fund to the commission for specified activities related to providing abortion by medication techniques at student health centers. This bill would require a student health center on a California State University or University of California campus, on or before January 1, 2028, to promote awareness of the services for abortion by medication techniques that the student health center offers, provide information on those services to students, and post the availability of those services on its internet website. This bill would require a community college that has a student health center, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to, on and after January 1, 2029, offer access to abortion by medication techniques, promote awareness of those services, provide information on those services to students, and post the availability of those services on its internet website. The bill would require the commission to submit a report to the Legislature, on or before January 1, 2030, that includes, but is not limited to, specified information relating to abortion by medication techniques at or through community college student health centers. The bill would require the commission, in consultation with the office of the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges, to develop a standardized reporting framework that minimizes administrative burden and protects student privacy. The bill would authorize funds appropriated for these provisions to be used for implementation readiness activities and ongoing operational costs, as specified.
Sponsored bills
Existing law designates specific days as holidays in this state. Existing law adopts state holidays as judicial holidays, with certain exceptions, including Admission Day and Columbus Day. Existing law designates holidays on which community colleges and public schools are authorized to close pursuant to a memorandum of understanding between the governing board and represented employees, including "Native American Day" on the 4th Friday in September. This bill would add "Eid al-Fitr" and "Eid al-Adha" to the list of state holidays. The bill would exclude "Eid al-Fitr" and "Eid al-Adha" from designation as judicial holidays. The bill would authorize community colleges and public schools to close on "Eid al-Fitr" and "Eid al-Adha," as specified. Existing law entitles state employees, with specified exceptions, to be given time off with pay for specified holidays. Existing law, in addition, authorizes state employees to elect to use 8 hours of vacation, annual leave, compensating time off, or personal holiday credit corresponding with specified dates. This bill would, similarly, permit the employee to elect to receive the holiday credit for the holidays of "Eid al-Fitr" or "Eid al-Adha," as specified. The bill would, for those holidays whose dates vary annually, instead authorize the above-described election to be made on the date designated by their group. The bill would make findings and declarations related to the purpose of the Eid holidays. The bill would make its provisions severable. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 135 of the Code of Civil Procedure proposed by AB 2294 to be operative only if this bill and AB 2294 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. The bill also would incorporate additional changes to Sections 45203, 79020, and 88203 of the Education Code proposed by SB 1394 to be operative only if this bill and SB 1394 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. The bill further would incorporate additional changes to Section 6700 of the Government Code proposed by AB 2294 and SB 1394 to be operative only if this bill and either or both of those bills are enacted and this bill is enacted last. The bill further would incorporate additional changes to Sections 19853 and 19853.1 of the Government Code proposed by SB 1394 and AB 1841 to be operative only if this bill and either or both of those bills are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
The federal Voting Rights Act of 1965 requires a state or political subdivision in which more than 5% of voting-age citizens, or more than 10,000 voting-age citizens, are members of a single language minority and limited-English proficient to provide certain election materials, including ballots, in the language of the applicable language minority group. Existing state law requires the Secretary of State to determine for each county and precinct whether it is appropriate to provide facsimile copies of the ballot and other election materials in languages other than English. If the Secretary of State determines the number of voting age residents in a county or precinct who are members of a single language minority, and who lack sufficient skills in English to vote without assistance, is 3% or more of the voting-age residents of the county or precinct, county elections officials must provide facsimile ballots and other election materials in the applicable language. This bill would require the Secretary of State, on or before December 15, 2031, and on or before December 15 in every year ending in 1 or 7 thereafter, to identify the counties where at least 10,000 voting age citizens, or 5% of voting age citizens, are limited English proficient and either members of a single language minority group or speak a shared language. The bill would require the elections official in an identified political subdivision to provide translated election materials in any language that meets those criteria or, for an election occurring before December 15, 2031, in any language in which the political subdivision is required to provide language assistance under the Voting Rights Act of 1965, within a specified period of time. The elections official would be required to translate, among other things, all official and sample ballots, voter registration forms, and election notices and instructions. The elections official would also be required to have a sufficient number of bilingual election workers to provide language assistance to any voter who needs it. If the Secretary of State or another state agency provides election-related forms, instructions, assistance, or other materials or services in an identified political subdivision, the bill would require the Secretary of State or other state agency to translate the materials or services into any language that meets the criteria within that political subdivision. Beginning January 1, 2027, the bill would also authorize the Secretary of State to require a political subdivision to provide translated election materials if interested citizens or entities provide the Secretary of State with a preponderance of evidence that a language group meets any of the above-described criteria. The bill would also make various conforming changes. By increasing the duties of local elections officials, the bill would create a state-mandated local program. The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 13307 of the Elections Code proposed by SB 715 to be operative only if this bill and SB 715 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. 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, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Existing law, the Naturopathic Doctors Act, which is repealed on January 1, 2027, establishes the California Board of Naturopathic Medicine within the Department of Consumer Affairs to license and regulate naturopathic doctors. The act requires the board to consist of 9 members, appointed by the Governor, Speaker of the Assembly, or the Senate Committee on Rules, as specified, and requires each member of the board be appointed to a 4-year term. This bill would instead repeal those provisions on January 1, 2031. The bill would specify that the 4-year term expires 4 years after the date of the appointment. To ensure staggered terms, the bill would require that specified members appointed by the Governor after the effective date of this bill be appointed for prescribed term lengths and thereafter would require all appointments be for four-year terms. The bill would also make nonsubstantive changes to the provisions specifying the appointment authorities for the board members. Existing law sets forth fees associated with the application and renewal of a license, including a renewal fee of $1,000 and authorizing an increase to not more than $1,200. This bill would, instead, specify that this fee range applies to the renewal of an active license and would require the renewal fee for an inactive license to be one-half of the current renewal fee for an active license. The bill would authorize the board to accept the voluntary cancellation of a naturopathic doctor's license, as prescribed, upon the written request of the licensee, provided that the cancellation is not in lieu of an administrative enforcement action. Existing law requires an applicant to have received a degree in naturopathic medicine from an approved naturopathic medical school, as specified. Existing law requires the board to approve a naturopathic medical school program that is accredited by the Council on Naturopathic Medical Education (CNME) or another federally recognized accrediting body if the program meets specified admission and program requirements. This bill would, instead, require the board to approve a program that is accredited by either the CNME or a substantially equivalent accreditor, or that is housed in an accredited institution and meets standards substantially equivalent to those required by CNME, if the program meets the above-described admission and program requirements and other specified requirements. Existing law, the Medical Practice Act, makes it a crime to practice or hold oneself out as practicing medicine, as specified, without having a certificate to do so. Under existing law, providing services other than those specified is not a violation of that crime if the person providing those services discloses that they are not a licensed physician, among other things, and obtains a written acknowledgment from the client before providing those services. The Naturopathic Doctors Act makes it a crime to claim to be a naturopathic doctor without a valid license under the act but does not restrict use of the title "naturopath." The Naturopathic Doctors Act also does not limit activity otherwise allowed by law, including the practice of naturopathy, and authorizes an unlicensed person who engages in specified activities to represent that they "practice naturopathy," if they comply with the above-described provisions of the Medical Practice Act. This bill would revise and recast those provisions. Specifically, the bill would make it a crime to practice or hold oneself out as practicing naturopathic medicine, as specified, without having a license to do so. The bill would specify that engaging in activity that is otherwise allowed by law or using the title "naturopath" is a not a violation of this crime if the person complies with the above-described provisions of the Medical Practice Act and discloses they are not a naturopathic doctor, as provided. By establishing a new crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law, the Medical Practice Act, prohibits use of any fictitious, false, or assumed name by a physician and surgeon or any doctor of podiatric medicine, as specified, in any public communication, advertisement, sign, or announcement of a practice without a fictitious-name permit. Existing law requires the Medical Board of California or the Division of Licensing to issue a fictitious-name permit if the applicant for the permit satisfies certain conditions, including having a name that includes specified designations. This bill would prohibit the use of any fictitious, false, or assumed name by a naturopathic doctor, as specified, in any public communication, advertisement, sign, or announcement of a practice without a fictitious-name permit. The bill would require the California Board of Naturopathic Medicine to issue a fictitious-name permit if the applicant for the permit satisfies certain conditions. The bill would require the application fee for a fictitious name permit to be $100 and would require the renewal fee for a fictitious-name permit to be $50. The Naturopathic Doctors Act authorizes the board to grant a license to an applicant who meets specified requirements, but who graduated before 1986, and passed a state or Canadian Province naturopathic licensing examination, as specified. The act requires that applications under this provision be received no later than December 31, 2007. This bill would repeal those provisions. 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, commonly known as the Cartwright Act, identifies certain acts as unlawful restraints of trade and unlawful trusts and prescribes provisions for its enforcement. Chapter 338 of the Statutes of 2025 provides that in a complaint for any violation of the Cartwright Act, it is sufficient to contain factual allegations demonstrating that the existence of a contract, combination in the form of a trust, or conspiracy to restrain trade or commerce is plausible. Chapter 338 of the Statutes of 2025 also provides that a complaint for any violation of the Cartwright Act is not required to allege facts tending to exclude the possibility of independent action. Existing case law, In re Cipro Cases I & II (2015) 61 Cal.4th 116, establishes a rule of reason analysis for certain claims under the Cartwright Act, which, among other things, determines whether an act was made for the purpose of avoiding competition and whether the anticompetitive effects of the agreement outweigh any procompetitive justifications. This bill would prohibit any person from monopolizing or monopsonizing any part of trade or commerce, as provided. The bill would require courts to use the analytical framework and guidance provided in In re Cipro Cases I & II. The bill would require a plaintiff bringing an action under its provisions to allege, and prove at trial, substantial market power through either direct or indirect evidence. The bill would exempt a small business, as defined, from these provisions. The bill would provide that its provisions do not prevent, limit, or prohibit certain conduct and legal instruments, including exclusive franchises granted and supervised by a local, state, or federal governmental agency. This bill would require any action brought pursuant to these provisions to be initiated only by the Attorney General or a district attorney, and would, with certain exceptions, preclude an alleged violation under its provisions from serving as a predicate violation under the Unfair Competition Law. The bill would require an action brought pursuant to these provisions to be filed as a "complex case" pursuant to provisions of law requiring the assessment of additional court fees, as specified. The bill would also make related findings and declarations. The bill would require courts to liberally interpret California's antitrust laws to best promote free and fair competition, as provided. Because the bill would expand the scope of activities prohibited by the Cartwright Act, the violation of which is punishable as a crime, the 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 various protections for California Native American tribes, including prohibiting a public agency or private party using or occupying public property or operating on public property from interfering with the free expression or exercise of Native American religion as provided in the United States Constitution and the California Constitution. Existing law also requires a local government to provide formal notification to each California Native American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project site as an invitation to consult on the proposed project, as provided. Existing law requires the local government, during the consultation, to give deference to the tribal information, tribal knowledge and customs, and the significance of the resource to the California Native American tribe. Existing law prohibits any information, as described, that is submitted by a California Native American tribe during the environmental review process from being included in the environmental document or otherwise disclosed by the lead agency or any other public agency to the public, as specified, without the prior consent of the tribe that provided the information. Existing law, the California Public Records Act, requires each state and local agency, as defined, to make its records open to public inspection at all times during office hours, except as specifically exempted from disclosure by law. The act specifically exempts from disclosure records that are exempted or prohibited from disclosure by federal or state law and lists records subject to that exemption, specifying that the listed exemptions are not inclusive of all exemptions under the act. This bill, the California Indian Freedom Act of 2026, would, commencing January 1, 2028, prohibit a governmental agency from substantially burdening a California Indian or California Native American tribe's exercise of religious beliefs or spiritual practices on state lands, except as necessary to protect public safety and security, including their access to and use of sacred sites and objects, and their ability to perform religious ceremonies and rites, even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability, unless the governmental agency demonstrates that application of the burden is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest and is in the least restrictive means of furthering that interest. The bill would provide that a California Native American tribe has exclusive standing to assert a violation of these provisions and would authorize a California Native American tribe to assert a violation of these provisions as a claim or defense in any judicial or administrative proceeding, as specified. The bill would require a governmental agency to allow California Indians access to sacred sites on state lands, as specified. The bill would require a governmental agency to seek and document free, prior, and informed consent from affected tribes before undertaking any physical change to a state land, as described, which the agency has actual knowledge is a sacred site where the action may pose a risk to sacred sites, as specified. The bill would require the affirmation of consent from the governing body of the affected tribe to be in writing, as described. This bill would require the Department of General Services, in coordination with the Capitol Protective Section and the Joint Rules Committee, to the greatest extent possible, to uphold the religious freedom, ceremonial practices, sacred sites, cultural patrimony, and cultural landscapes of tribes when accessing the State Capitol grounds. The bill would require the Joint Rules Committee, in coordination with the Capitol Protective Section and the State Senate Capitol Security Program, to the greatest extent possible, to uphold the religious freedom, ceremonial practices, sacred sites, cultural patrimony, and cultural landscapes of tribes when accessing the State Capitol Building, as specified. This bill would provide that the application of the act is strictly limited to a governmental agency's management actions that involve only state lands, as specified. The bill would declare that specified provisions of the bill do not apply to the authority of the State Water Resources Control Board to authorize, curtail, or otherwise regulate the diversion and use of water, or to the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. This bill would require information identifying sacred sites, cultural landscapes, or religious practices obtained by a governmental agency for the purposes of the California Indian Freedom Act of 2026 to be confidential and would exempt this information from public record laws, including the California Public Records Act. The bill would revise the list of exempted records under the California Public Records Act to add the above-described exemption. The bill would prohibit the provisions of the act from being construed to limit or restrict the authority of the state or any state agency to enter into an agreement, memorandum of understanding, or other arrangement with any tribe to allow access to any state lands for the purpose of conducting religious, cultural, or ceremonial practices. The bill would define various terms for these purposes and would make related legislative findings. 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.
Existing law requires law enforcement agencies, departments, or entities to consider specified best practices regarding the downloading and storage of body-worn camera data, such as specifically stating the length of time that recorded data is to be stored, when establishing policies and procedures for the implementation and operation of a body-worn camera system, as specified. This bill would require, on or before July 1, 2027, each law enforcement agency that has a body-worn camera policy to update that policy to include a procedure for emergency service personnel to request the redaction of evidentiary and nonevidentiary recordings of a patient undergoing medical or psychological evaluation, procedure, or treatment by emergency service personnel, and to maintain an unredacted copy of the recording consistent with the policies and procedures of the agency. By requiring local law enforcement agencies to adopt new policies, 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, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Existing law creates within the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, under the Undersecretary for Operations, the Division of Adult Institutions, among others, and requires each division to be headed by a director, who is appointed by the Governor, as specified. Existing law also requires the Governor to appoint 4 subordinate officers to the division, as specified. Existing law requires each subordinate officer appointed to oversee an identified category of adult institutions, one of which oversees female offender facilities. This bill would instead require the Governor to appoint 3 subordinate officers, as specified, who would oversee an identified category of male adult institutions, and one subordinate officer, as specified, who would oversee female adult institutions. The bill would create within the department, and under the Undersecretary for Operations, the Division of Female Programs and Services. The bill would require the director of this division to be responsible solely for female adult institutions and community facilities housing female offenders. The bill would require the director to report to the undersecretary and to have a minimum of 5 years of experience serving a female correctional population in a custody setting. The bill would also require this new division to manage and provide oversight of adult female programs, including prisons, conservation camps, and parole and community programs and to develop gender-responsive, trauma-informed, culturally sensitive approaches to program and policy development. Existing law requires the department to create a Female Offender Reform Master Plan and present it to the Legislature by a specified date. Existing law requires the department to, among other things, create policies and operational practices that are designed to ensure a safe and productive institutional environment for female offenders. This bill would require the department to provide a report to the Legislature on the implementation of the plan, and update statistics contained in the plan, by March 1, 2027, and every 3 years thereafter. The bill would require the department to maintain the plan, including subsequent updates and reports, in consultation with the commission and others, as specified. The bill would also require the department to post the plan, any reports, and any updates to the plan to the department's internet website. This bill would require the department to establish the Gender Responsive Strategies Commission (GRSC) to develop active partnerships and to support successful implementation of gender responsive practices and rehabilitation programs for incarcerated individuals. The bill would require the GRSC to be composed of 19 representatives, as specified, and would require the department, by June 1, 2027, and annually thereafter, to provide a written report to the Legislature on appointments to the GRSC and the department's response and progress toward implementing the GRSC's recommendations. Existing law also requires the department to contract with nationally recognized gender-responsive experts in prison operational practices, staffing, classification, substance abuse, trauma treatment services, mental health services, transitional services, and community corrections to, among other things, conduct a staffing analysis of all current job classifications assigned to each prison that houses only females, as specified, and develop programs and training for department staff in correctional facilities. This bill would require the department, through this contract, no later than March 1, 2027, and every 3 years thereafter, to prepare and submit to the Legislature an updated staffing analysis and would require a comprehensive review of the office's policies and practices and other aspects of women-centered corrections developed to enhance safety and rehabilitative efforts, as specified. The bill would also require the training program to include training at the academy and, for those working in a female prison, 40 hours of initial training with a curriculum specifically focused on working with the population within female institutions and an 8-hour annual training thereafter. Existing law requires the secretary of the department to expand the existing prison ombudsperson program to ensure the comprehensive deployment of ombudspersons throughout the state prison system with specific focus on the maximum security institutions. This bill would instead require the Undersecretary for Operations to perform this duty and would require the undersecretary to appoint an ombudsperson solely assigned to adult female institutions.
Existing law makes it a misdemeanor for any person having charge of a completed vote by mail ballot to interfere with a ballot's return to the local elections official. This bill would additionally make it a misdemeanor for any person having charge of a vote by mail ballot to interfere, as defined, with a ballot's delivery to a voter. The bill would make it a felony for a person with authority to direct one or more persons subject to their supervision or authority to interfere with a ballot's return to the local elections official or delivery to a voter. 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. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law generally regulates artificial intelligence, including companion chatbots, as defined. Existing law requires an operator, as defined, to prevent a companion chatbot on its companion chatbot platform from engaging with users unless the operator maintains a protocol for preventing the production of suicidal ideation, suicide, or self-harm content to the user. Existing law requires an operator, for a user the operator knows is a minor, to take certain prescribed action, including disclosing to the user that the user is interacting with artificial intelligence. This bill would delete those provisions imposing requirements on an operator if the operator knows the user is a minor. The Digital Age Assurance Act requires a person who owns, maintains, or controls a software application, as defined, to request age bracket data sent by a real-time secure application programming interface or operating system with respect to a particular user from an operating system provider or a covered application store when the application is downloaded and launched. This bill would require an operator, as defined, of a companion chatbot to, beginning July 1, 2027, before making a new or substantially modified companion chatbot available to users in the state, do various things with respect to child safety, including perform and document a comprehensive risk assessment related to the design, configuration, and operation of the companion chatbot with respect to minor users that contains, among other things, a summary of the results of any evaluation of each covered harm, as defined, pertaining to the companion chatbot. The bill would require an operator to submit to independent child safety audits of its compliance with the bill, as specified. The bill would require an auditor to produce a report that describes whether the operator has established and adhered to policies and practices to comply with the bill that includes, among other things, the signature of the lead auditor certifying the results of the audit under penalty of perjury. By expanding the scope of the crime of perjury, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would authorize the Attorney General to, for cause, request and obtain a copy of an AI child safety audit report from the operator and would make a child safety audit report submitted to the Attorney General confidential. This bill would authorize certain public prosecutors to bring a civil action to enforce the bill's provisions, as specified, and would authorize a child who suffers an actual harm as a result of a violation of this chapter, or a parent or guardian acting on behalf of that child, to bring a civil action against the operator, as specified. 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.