Detention and incarceration of pregnant and postpartum defendants.
Summary
Existing law gives a judge discretion when deciding various matters in a criminal proceeding, including, among other things, issuing bail or releasing a defendant on their own recognizance, accepting a diversion or deferred entry of judgment agreement, and imposing sentences and granting probation. This bill would, when a court is exercising its discretion with regard to these matters, make a rebuttable presumption against detention and incarceration of a pregnant or postpartum defendant, as defined, if the defendant provides the court and district attorney with notice of the defendant's status as a pregnant or postpartum defendant at each applicable stage of the proceedings. The bill would require a court that decides to detain or incarcerate a defendant after this consideration to make specific findings on the record that the risk to public safety or any other factor the court is required to consider is substantial enough to outweigh the risk of incarceration, as specified. The bill would authorize a person who may be pregnant or postpartum and who is arrested or in custody in a county jail to request a pregnancy test upon or following admission to the county jail and would require the county jail to provide a pregnancy test upon request and allow the person to take the pregnancy test within 24 hours after the request. The bill would require a county jail to keep a record of specified information, including the total number of incarcerated pregnant people at that county jail. By imposing additional duties on county jails, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would authorize a pregnant or postpartum defendant to request a stay of execution of their sentence by filing a written request to the court if the pregnant or postpartum defendant is detained or incarcerated in a county jail for any period of time through the end of the pregnancy or the postpartum period, except as specified. The bill would require the court to apply the rebuttable presumption above when considering whether to grant that stay of execution. The bill would authorize a court to order a stay of execution of the sentence for any period of time through the end of the pregnancy or the postpartum period. 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
failed
1 of 4 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2025
Committee Review
Floor Vote
Governor
Introduced Feb 19, 2025
Last action Feb 2, 2026
Maddy AI version diff · 1 comparison
What changed between versions
02/19/25 - Introduced
→
AB923
·
1 edit
MINOR
No substantive policy changes were made between these two versions of AB 923. The diff reflects a change in document presentation format only: the bill text moved from a plain-text legislative document layout (with line numbers and page headers) to a web page rendering that includes site navigation elements (home, search, bill information links, etc.). All policy content - definitions, the rebuttable presumption against detention, pregnancy testing requirements, stay of execution provisions, data collection duties, and state mandate reimbursement - is identical in both versions.
TECHNICAL
The document was reformatted from a plain-text legislative bill layout with line numbers and page headers into a web page presentation that includes navigation menus (home, accessibility, FAQ, search, bill information, votes, history, analysis links) around the same bill text. No policy language was added, removed, or altered.
Floor votes
How they voted
No floor votes recorded yet.
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
8
Key actions
4
Committee
6
Feb 2, 2026
Lower · Passed
From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56.
lower
May 23, 2025
Lower · Passed
In committee: Held under submission.
lower
Apr 30, 2025
Committee
In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to suspense file.
lower
Apr 9, 2025
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 0.) (April 8). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Mar 10, 2025
Committee
Referred to Com. on PUB. S.
lower
Feb 20, 2025
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee March 22.
lower
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Sharon Quirk-Silva
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 923
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 923. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline