Existing law requires law enforcement agencies to report to the Department of Justice, as specified, any incident in which a peace officer is involved in a shooting or use of force that results in death or serious bodily injury. Existing law requires the state prosecutor to investigate incidents involving a shooting by a peace officer resulting in the death of an unarmed civilian. Existing law authorizes the state prosecutor to criminally prosecute any officer that, pursuant to an investigation, is found to have violated state law. Existing law provides that the Attorney General is the state prosecutor unless otherwise specified or named. This bill would require the state prosecutor to conduct an independent, transparent, and thorough investigation into incidents of an immigration enforcement officer-involved shooting resulting in the death of an unarmed civilian. The bill would authorize the state prosecutor to criminally prosecute an immigration enforcement officer that, pursuant to an investigation, is found to have violated state law. The bill would require the state prosecutor to post and maintain on a public internet website each written report, as specified. The bill provides that the Attorney General is the state prosecutor unless otherwise specified or named. This bill would provide that the provisions of this bill are severable.
Sponsored bills
Existing law prohibits an employer or any other person from engaging in, or directing another person to engage in, an unfair immigration-related practice against a person for the purpose of, or with the intent of, retaliating against any person for exercising a right protected under state labor and employment laws or under a local ordinance applicable to employees, as specified. Existing law authorizes a civil action for equitable relief and damages or penalties, as specified, by an employee or other person who is the subject of an unfair immigration-related practice. This bill would expand the above-described prohibition to include retaliating against any person for exercising any right under any local, state, or federal statute or regulation applicable to employees, as defined, and would prohibit preventing a person from exercising such a right. The bill would also prohibit an employer or any other person from engaging in any other conduct, related to any person's perceived immigration status, that would reasonably tend to dissuade a person from engaging in conduct that the person has a legal right to engage in under any local, state, or federal statute or regulation applicable to employees, or to induce a person to engage in conduct that the person has a legal right to abstain from under any local, state, or federal statute or regulation applicable to employees. The bill would make an employer or other person who violates these provisions liable for a civil penalty not exceeding $10,000 per employee or person for each violation, as specified. The bill would also make related and conforming changes to these provisions.
Existing law authorizes a borrower who is experiencing financial hardship that prevents the borrower from making timely payments on a specified residential mortgage loan due directly to a specified state of emergency proclaimed by the Governor, or a specified federally declared disaster, to request forbearance on their residential mortgage loan, as prescribed. Existing law requires a mortgage servicer, except as specified, to offer mortgage payment forbearance for an initial 90-day period that may be extended up to a maximum forbearance period of 12 months and prohibits a mortgage servicer from assessing any late fees to the borrower's account or charging a default rate of interest during the forbearance period. This bill would, among other things, similarly authorize a borrower to request forbearance on a residential mortgage loan, as defined, secured by residential real property that has become uninhabitable as a direct result of a disaster, which the bill would define to mean the conditions described in a declaration of a disaster issued by the federal government. The bill would require the borrower to affirm that as a direct result of a disaster, a residential unit is uninhabitable. Because the bill would expand the crime of perjury, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would, except as specified, require a mortgage servicer to offer mortgage payment forbearance of a period of up to an initial 180 days, to be extended at the request of the borrower in 90-day increments, up to a maximum forbearance period of 12 months. The bill would provide that the forbearance period includes any period of forbearance related to the disaster that a mortgage servicer has provided to a borrower before the date upon which a declaration of a disaster was issued. The bill would also prohibit a mortgage servicer from assessing any late fees to the borrower's account or charging a default rate of interest during the forbearance period. This bill would require a mortgage servicer to report the credit obligations of borrowers under a disaster-related forbearance plan in compliance with the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act. For an account granted disaster-related mortgage payment relief, the bill would prohibit a mortgage servicer from furnishing information during the forbearance period indicating that the payments are in forbearance and would require the mortgage servicer to report the credit obligation or account as current. This bill would authorize a civil action to enforce these provisions to be brought by the Attorney General, a district attorney, or a county counsel. 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 board of supervisors of each county, following each decennial federal census, and using that census as a basis, to adjust the boundaries of any or all of the supervisorial districts of the county so that the districts are as nearly equal in population as possible and comply with applicable federal law, and specifies the procedures the board of supervisors must follow in adjusting those boundaries. Existing law establishes independent redistricting commissions in the Counties of Los Angeles, San Diego, Orange, Riverside, San Luis Obispo, Kern, Fresno, and Sacramento, which are charged with adjusting the supervisorial district boundaries for their respective counties. This bill, upon appropriation by the Legislature, would establish the Citizens Redistricting Commission in the County of San Bernardino, which would be charged with adjusting the boundary lines of the districts of the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Bernardino. The commission would consist of 14 commissioners who meet specified qualifications. This bill would require the commission to adjust the boundaries of the supervisorial districts in accordance with specified criteria and adopt a redistricting plan in accordance with existing deadlines for the adoption of county supervisorial district boundaries. The bill would create specified procedures by which the commission may remove a commissioner. By increasing the duties on local officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the unique circumstances facing the County of San Bernardino. 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 authorizes a borrower to request forbearance on their residential mortgage loan for a period of 12 months if, among other things, the borrower affirms that they are experiencing financial hardship that prevents them from making timely payments on the loan due directly to the wildfire disaster described in the proclamation of a state of emergency issued by Governor Gavin Newsom on January 7, 2025, or the federally declared disaster, declared on January 8, 2025, related to the Eaton Wildfire, the Palisades Fire, and the Straight-line Winds. Existing law requires an applicant requesting forbearance on their residential mortgage loan to affirm that they are experiencing a financial hardship due to the wildfire disaster. Existing law requires that request to be made before the earlier of either 6 months after the date upon which the state of emergency is terminated or January 7, 2027. Existing law requires a borrower to be notified by the mortgage servicer within 10 business days whether their request for forbearance has been approved. Existing law prohibits any late fees from being assessed to the borrower's account during the period of forbearance, and the borrower from being charged a default rate of interest. This bill would extend the period of mortgage forbearance to 24 months and extend the latest possible deadline for a borrower's request for forbearance to January 7, 2029. The bill would require an applicant requesting forbearance on their residential mortgage loan to further affirm that the property securing the loan is uninhabitable due to the wildfire disaster. Because the bill would expand the crime of perjury, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. If the borrower has requested an extension of a forbearance period that would result in a total forbearance period of more than 12 months, the bill would authorize a mortgage servicer to request certain related documentation from the borrower, as specified. The bill would extend the amount of time the mortgage servicer has to notify the borrower whether their request for forbearance has been approved to 21 days or longer, as specified. During the period in which the borrower is waiting to be notified, the bill would prohibit any late fees from being assessed to the borrower's account, and the borrower from being charged a default rate of interest. Existing law requires a mortgage servicer to disclose to a borrower to whom a forbearance has been granted that the forborne mortgage payments are required to be repaid. Existing law prohibits requiring a borrower who was current on the residential mortgage loan when they entered forbearance to make a lump sum payment. This bill would require a mortgage servicer to offer the borrower the option to defer repayment of forborne amounts to the end of the loan term, as specified. 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, the Reproductive Privacy Act, declares as contrary to the public policy of this state a law of another state that authorizes a person to bring a civil action against a person or entity that engages in certain activities relating to obtaining or performing an abortion. Existing law prohibits the state from applying an out-of-state law to a case or controversy in state court or enforcing or satisfying a civil judgment under the out-of-state law. This bill would specify that the protections applicable to persons who engage in legally protected health care activity, as defined, apply to a person who previously has undertaken one or more acts or omissions while in another United States jurisdiction to aid or encourage, or attempt to aid or encourage, any person in the exercise and enjoyment, or attempted exercise and enjoyment, of rights to reproductive health care services or gender affirming health care services if the acts or omissions were permissible under the laws of the jurisdiction in which the person was located at the time of the acts or omissions. Existing law prohibits a state or local law enforcement agency or officer from knowingly arresting or knowingly participating in the arrest of any person for performing, supporting, or aiding in the performance of legally protected health care activity, if the health care activity is lawful in this state. Existing law prohibits a state or local public agency from cooperating with or providing information to an individual or agency from another state or a federal law enforcement agency, as specified, regarding a legally protected health care activity that is lawful in this state. Under existing law, the Governor may surrender, on demand of executive authority of any other state, any person in this state charged in the other state, as specified, with committing an act in this state, or in a 3rd state, intentionally resulting in a crime in the state whose executive authority is making the demand. This bill would prohibit the Governor from recognizing a request for extradition of a person subject to criminal liability based on the alleged provision or receipt of, assistance in the provision or receipt of, material support for, or in any theory of vicarious, joint, several, or conspiracy liability for any legally protected health care activity, except as specified.
Existing law makes a person who is a dealer in or collector of junk, metals, or secondhand materials, or their agent, employee, or representative, who buys or receives any wire, cable, copper, lead, solder, mercury, iron, or brass that the person knows or reasonably should know is used by or belongs to specified entities, including a railroad, certain utility companies, or a public entity engaged in furnishing public utility service, without using due diligence to ascertain that the person selling or delivering that material has a legal right to do so, guilty of criminally receiving that property and, in addition to imprisonment, makes that act punishable by a fine of not more than $5,000. This bill would prohibit organized metal theft, described as acting in concert with one or more persons to steal metal materials from one or more of specified materials and items with the intent to sell, exchange, or return those metal materials for value, acting in concert with 2 or more persons to receive, purchase, or possess those metal materials knowing or believing it to have been stolen, acting as an agent of another to steal those metal materials as part of an organized plan to commit theft, or recruiting, coordinating, organizing, supervising, directing, managing, or financing another to undertake acts of theft of metal. The bill would make a violation of organized metal theft punishable as either a misdemeanor or a felony. The bill would make related findings and declarations and state the intent of the Legislature. By creating new crimes, 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.
This measure would recognize the month of October each year as Student Financial Aid Awareness Month, and that it is important to increase student participation in financial aid programs to ensure that students receive clear, timely, and accessible information about application requirements, deadlines, and available resources.
Maddy summaryThis bill proposes declaring June 2026 as Electronic Dance Music Month. It directly affects organizations and individuals involved in the electronic dance music community by officially recognizing their culture during that specific timeframe. The primary mechanism is a formal resolution that sets aside the month for celebration and awareness of the genre. No new laws, funding, or regulations are created by this measure.
Existing law makes it an unlawful employment practice for an employer to refuse to grant a request by any employee to take up to 5 days of bereavement leave upon the death of a family member, as defined, to refuse to hire, or to discharge, demote, fine, suspend, expel, or discriminate against, an individual because of the individual's exercise of the right to bereavement leave or because of the individual's giving information or testimony as to their own or another person's bereavement leave, or to interfere with, restrain, or deny the exercise of, or the attempt to exercise, any of these rights, as specified. This bill would include a designated person identified by the employee, as specified, in the definition of "family member" and authorize an employer to limit an employee to one designated person per 12-month period for purposes of these provisions relating to bereavement leave.