Juries: peremptory challenges.

The bill was renumbered from 'Senate Bill No. 645' to 'Chapter 656' as it transitioned into the official statute compilation.

Added the Governor's approval date (October 11, 2025) and filing date with the Secretary of State.

Removed the Senate and Assembly passage pages and the Governor's receipt page, which are not part of the final chaptered statute.

The provision allowing courts to consider whether counsel has used peremptory challenges disproportionately against protected groups in past cases is now limited to situations where the party is a public entity. Previously, this consideration applied to any party's counsel regardless of whether they were private or public.

The blanket exemption that kept the anti-discrimination jury selection rules out of all civil cases is replaced with a narrower exemption. The rules now apply in four categories of civil cases: (1) civil rights violation actions including those under the Tom Bane Act, Unruh Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, Title VI, the Voting Rights Act, and the Fair Housing Act; (2) sexually violent predator civil commitment actions; (3) civil damages cases arising from hate crimes; and (4) dependency cases under the Welfare and Institutions Code.

The sunset provision that would have repealed the entire section on January 1, 2026 is removed, making the anti-discrimination jury selection rules permanent rather than temporary.

Dependency cases (Welfare and Institutions Code Section 300 et seq.) were removed from the list of civil cases where the peremptory challenge anti-discrimination provisions apply. Previously, dependency proceedings were included as a category of civil case subject to these rules; now they are not.

The notification requirement for covered civil cases was changed. The old version required the judicial officer to inform the parties that the party bringing the claim must notify the court and other parties. The new version removes the judicial officer's role entirely and directly requires the party bringing the claim to notify the court and the other party or parties after the final status conference (or at least 15 calendar days before trial if no status conference is held). This shifts responsibility from the court to the litigant.

The obligation to notify parties that peremptory challenge procedures apply in covered civil cases was shifted from the judicial officer to the party bringing the claim. The notifying party must do so after the final status conference or at least 15 calendar days before trial.

In subdivision (d)(3)(G), the condition for considering a counsel's history of peremptory challenge use was changed from 'if the party is a public entity' to 'if counsel or counsel's office is a public entity.' This focuses the inquiry on the attorney or law firm rather than the client.

The list of civil rights cases covered under subdivision (k)(2)(A) was narrowed by removing the phrase 'but not limited to,' making the enumerated list of covered statutes (Tom Bane Act, Unruh Act, Section 1983, Title VI, Voting Rights Act, Fair Housing Act, FEHA) exhaustive rather than illustrative.

A new subdivision (l) requires the judicial officer to inform parties that the peremptory challenge procedures apply in covered civil cases, after the final status conference or at least 15 calendar days before trial if no final status conference is held.

Added a new category (v) under subdivision (k)(2)(A) covering actions alleging a violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), including discrimination, harassment, or retaliation.

The civil commitment provision in subdivision (k)(2)(B) was broadened from covering only 'a person who is determined to be a sexually violent predator' to 'a person, including a person who is determined to be a sexually violent predator,' extending coverage to all civil commitment cases.

The introductory phrase in subdivision (k)(2)(A) was changed from 'including, but not limited to the following' to simply 'including the following,' narrowing the open-ended language that previously allowed courts to extend coverage beyond the listed categories.

In subdivision (k)(2)(A)(ii), the word 'and' between the Tom Bane Civil Rights Act and the Unruh Civil Rights Act was changed to 'or,' so a case need only allege a violation of one statute rather than both to be covered.