SB 980 California Senate · 2019-2020 Regular Session

Privacy: genetic testing companies.

Summary
Existing law, the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018, provides various protections to a consumer with respect to a business that collects the consumer's personal information, including biometric information such as the consumer's deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) . The act requires a business that collects a consumer's personal information to, at or before the point of collection, inform the consumer as to the categories of personal information to be collected and the purposes for which the information will be used, and grants to a consumer the right to opt-out of the sale of the consumer's personal information by the business to a third party. Existing law also prohibits the disclosure by a health care service plan of the results of a test for a genetic characteristic to a third party in a manner that identifies or provides identifying characteristics of the person to whom the tests results apply, except pursuant to a written authorization. This bill would establish the Genetic Information Privacy Act, which would require a direct-to-consumer genetic testing company, as defined, or any other company that collects, uses, maintains, or discloses genetic data collected or derived from a direct-to-consumer genetic testing product or service, or provided directly by a consumer, to provide a consumer with certain information regarding the company's policies and procedures for the collection, use, maintenance, and disclosure, as applicable, of genetic data, and to obtain a consumer's express consent for collection, use, or disclosure of the consumer's genetic data, as specified. This bill would require a direct-to-consumer genetic testing company, or other company as described above, to honor a consumer's revocation of consent in accordance with certain procedures and to destroy a consumer's biological sample within 30 days of revocation of consent. The bill would further require a direct-to-consumer genetic testing company, or other company as described above, to comply with all applicable laws for disclosing genetic data to law enforcement without a consumer's express consent, implement and maintain reasonable security procedures and practices to protect a consumer's genetic data against unauthorized access, destruction, use, modification, or disclosure, and develop procedures and practices to enable a consumer to access their genetic data and to delete their account and genetic data, as specified. The bill would exclude the California newborn screening program from its provisions. This bill would impose civil penalties for a violation of those provisions, as specified. The bill would require actions for relief pursuant to these provisions to be prosecuted exclusively by the Attorney General, a district attorney, county counsel, city attorney, or city prosecutor, as specified, in the name of the people of the State of California upon their own complaint or upon the complaint of a board, officer, person, corporation, or association. Because the bill would require local officials to perform additional duties, 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, 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.
Bill status vetoed 4 of 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2020
Committee Review
Aug 2020
Senate Passage
Jun 2020
Assembly Passage
Aug 2020
Vetoed
Sep 2020
Introduced Feb 11, 2020 Vetoed Sep 25, 2020
Floor votes · Senate Jun 25, 2020 · Assembly Aug 31, 2020

How they voted

320
Passed · 3 other
Total votes 35
Jun 25, 2020
D Democratic26
24 Yea 2
92% Yea
R Republican9
8 Yea 1
88% Yea
Vote distribution
All Yea All Nay Mixed No data
Full legislative history

Actions timeline

Total actions
36
Key actions
12
Committee
9
Amendments
4
Sep 25, 2020
Vetoed
In Senate. Consideration of Governor's veto pending.
upper
Sep 25, 2020
Vetoed
Vetoed by the Governor.
upper
Aug 31, 2020
Assembly · Passed
Assembly Vote: pass (63-0-9)
assembly
Aug 31, 2020
Upper · Passed
Assembly amendments concurred in. (Ayes 39. Noes 0.) Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.
upper
Aug 30, 2020
Introduced
In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.
upper
Aug 30, 2020
Lower · Passed
Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 69. Noes 0. Page 5307.) Ordered to the Senate.
lower
Aug 25, 2020
Lower · Passed
Read third time and amended.
lower
Aug 20, 2020
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 15. Noes 1.) (August 20).
lower
Aug 6, 2020
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 10. Noes 0.) (August 4).
lower
Jul 28, 2020
Lower · Passed
July 28 hearing postponed by committee.
lower
Jul 9, 2020
Lower · Passed
July 14 hearing postponed by committee.
lower
Jun 29, 2020
Committee
Referred to Com. on P. & C.P.
lower
Jun 25, 2020
Upper · Passed
Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 36. Noes 1. Page 3864.) Ordered to the Assembly.
upper
Jun 18, 2020
Upper · Passed
Read second time and amended. Ordered to second reading.
upper
Jun 18, 2020
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 5. Noes 1. Page 3768.) (June 18).
upper
May 28, 2020
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 7. Noes 1. Page 3583.) (May 22).
upper
May 12, 2020
Committee
Referral to Com. on PUB. S. rescinded due to the shortened 2020 Legislative Calendar.
upper
Feb 20, 2020
Committee
Referred to Coms. on JUD. and PUB. S.
upper
Feb 11, 2020
Introduced
Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
upper
1 primary · 2 co-sponsors

Sponsors