Existing law contains numerous provisions governing the qualifications, standards, and training of peace officers. Existing law specifies circumstances that disqualify a person from holding office or being employed as a peace officer, including, among other things, having been convicted of a felony. This bill, the GTFO Act, would, commencing January 1, 2028, disqualify from being a peace officer a person previously employed as a sworn law enforcement officer or individual contractor and personally engaged in immigration enforcement, as defined, except as specified. Existing law requires each class of public officers or employees declared by law to be peace officers to meet specified minimum standards, including that they be 18 years of age or older, be fingerprinted for purposes of search of local, state, and national fingerprint files to disclose a criminal record, and be of good moral character, as determined by a thorough background investigation. This bill would, for purposes of those background investigations, authorize a hiring agency to consider news articles, verified social media posts, filings of civil complaints, and other verified sources. This bill, for purposes of an applicant who was previously employed as a sworn law enforcement officer or individual contractor and personally engaged in immigration enforcement, would require the hiring agency to complete the background investigation before the candidate participates in a Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) basic course. The bill would require the hiring agency to review the background investigation and determine if the individual is suitable to enter the POST basic course subject to certain suitability standards adopted by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training. This bill would require every applicant seeking appointment as a peace officer or enrollment in a POST basic course to submit to the hiring agency a declaration submitted under penalty of perjury that states whether the applicant has, at any time been employed as a sworn law enforcement officer or individual contractor that personally engaged in immigration enforcement, as specified. By requiring this statement to be made under penalty of perjury, the bill would expand the scope of a crime and impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law, the State Civil Service Act, requires that the employment procedures of the Department of Human Resources (CalHR) and of each state agency conform to the federal and state laws governing employment practices, including the use of employment forms. Existing law requires employment forms used by a state agency to require a person applying for employment to disclose whether the person has entered into an agreement with the state regarding any previous employment with the state that prohibits the person from seeking or accepting any subsequent employment with the state. This bill would additionally require the above-described employment forms to require a person applying for employment to disclose whether the person has been employed as a sworn law enforcement officer or individual contractor that personally engaged in immigration enforcement, as defined. Existing law authorizes CalHR or a designated appointing power to refuse to examine or, after examination, to refuse to declare as eligible, or to withhold or withdraw from certification, prior to appointment, anyone who meets certain criteria, such as a person who has misrepresented themselves during the application process. This bill would add to these criteria a person who was previously employed as a sworn law enforcement officer or individual contractor and personally engaged in immigration enforcement, as defined, except as specified. Existing law makes a person ineligible to hold office or employment of any kind with the state, or any county, city, district, or other political or governmental unit of the state, if the person has by oath bound themselves to support, maintain, or further the military or political activities or policies of a foreign government, as specified, or to obey the orders or directions of any foreign government or its officials. This bill, commencing January 1, 2028, would make a person ineligible to hold public employment, including employment with a city, county, district, or any other public agency of the state, because the person was previously employed as a sworn law enforcement officer or individual contractor and personally engaged in immigration enforcement, as defined, except as specified. Existing law requires the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training to establish a certification program for peace officers. Existing law requires, for each applicant for admission to a basic course of training certified by the commission that includes the carrying and use of firearms, who is not sponsored by a local or other law enforcement agency or is not a peace officer employed by a state or local agency, department, or district, to submit written certification from the Department of Justice that the applicant is eligible to possess, receive, own, and purchase a firearm pursuant to state and federal law. This bill would, for purposes of an applicant for the basic course who was previously employed as a sworn law enforcement officer or individual contractor and personally engaged in immigration enforcement, require the commission to deny suitability for enrollment in the basic course, unless the commission receives notice from the hiring agency granting the applicant's suitability, as specified. The bill, by January 1, 2028, would require the commission to adopt, by regulation, a definition of "suitability," as specified. Existing law requires any background investigation of a candidate for a peace officer position to include an inquiry into whether the candidate has engaged or is engaging in membership in a hate group. This bill would require the background investigation to include an inquiry into whether the candidate has engaged in immigration enforcement. By increasing the duties of local agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would make the provisions of the act severable. 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 1029 of the Government Code proposed by AB 1627 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1627 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. The bill would also incorporate additional changes to Section 13510.8 of the Penal Code proposed by AB 2337 to be operative only if this bill and AB 2337 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 with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Existing law makes it a crime to, by force, threat of force, or physical obstruction that is a crime of violence, intentionally injure, intimidate, interfere with, or attempt to injure, intimidate, or interfere with any person lawfully exercising or seeking to exercise the First Amendment right of religious freedom at a place of religious worship. This bill would make it unlawful for a person to, within a radius of 100 feet from an entrance or exit of a place of religious worship, as defined, intentionally approach another person seeking to enter or exit a place of religious worship within 8 feet of that person to either pass a leaflet or handbill to, display a sign to, or engage in oral protest or education or to harass, obstruct, threaten, or intimidate the person or occupant. The bill would, for the purposes of determining that distance, measure from the body of the person seeking to enter or exit, or the exterior of a motor vehicle they occupy, to the body of, or any sign or object held by, the other person. The bill would prescribe specified fines, imprisonment, or fine and imprisonment for a violation of these provisions. By creating a new 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.
Under existing law, if a person is convicted of either driving under the influence (DUI) of any alcoholic beverage or drug, or under the combined influence of any alcoholic beverage and drug or driving while having 0.08% or more, by weight, of alcohol in the person's blood within 10 years of 2 separate violations of specified DUI offenses, or any combination thereof, that resulted in convictions, that person has committed an offense punishable by imprisonment in the county jail for not less than 120 days nor more than one year and by a fine, as specified. This bill would, instead, make the above DUI conviction punishable as a wobbler by imprisonment in the county jail for not less than 120 days nor more than one year and by a fine, as specified, or by imprisonment in the county jail for 16 months or 2 or 3 years and a fine, as specified. By increasing the punishment of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Under existing law, if a person is convicted of DUI and the offense occurred within 10 years of 3 or more separate violations for driving under the influence that resulted in specified convictions, that person has committed an offense punishable as either a misdemeanor or a felony. This bill would, instead, make the above DUI conviction punishable as a wobbler if the offense occurred within 10 years of 3 separate violations for driving under the influence that resulted in specified convictions, and punishable as a felony by imprisonment in the county jail for 16 months or 2 or 3 years and a fine, as specified, if the offense occurred within 10 years of 4 or more separate violations for driving under the influence that resulted in specified convictions. By increasing the punishment of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would make conforming changes. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Sections 23546, 23550, and 23550.5 of the Vehicle Code proposed by AB 1830 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1830 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Under existing law, a county elections official is required to prepare a certified statement of the results of an election and submit it to the county board of supervisors within 30 days of the election. This bill would make it a felony, punishable by imprisonment for 16 months or 2 or 3 years, to seize or cause or assist in the seizure of ballots, election records, or certified voting technology before election results are certified by the elections official. The bill would also make it a felony punishable by imprisonment for 2, 3, or 4 years for any person with authority to direct another person subject to their supervision or authority to seize ballots, election records, or certified voting technology before election results are certified. By creating new crimes, 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 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 a legally protected health care activity, as defined, or for obtaining a legally protected health care activity, if the legally protected 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. Existing law prohibits specified persons, including a judicial officer, a court employee, or an authorized attorney, among others, from issuing a subpoena in connection with a proceeding in another state regarding an individual performing, supporting, or aiding in the performance of a legally protected health care activity in this state, or an individual obtaining a legally protected health care activity in this state, if the legally protected health care activity is lawful in this state. This bill would make those provisions apply regardless of the patient's location. Existing law authorizes the Governor to surrender, on demand of the executive authority of any other state, any person in this state charged in the other state 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 additionally prohibit a state or local law enforcement agency or officer from knowingly arresting or participating in the arrest of any person who the Governor has declined to surrender. Existing law requires any out-of-state subpoena, warrant, wiretap order, pen register trap and trace order, or other legal process to include an affidavit or declaration under penalty of perjury that the discovery request is not in connection with an out-of-state proceeding relating to a legally protected health care activity, except as specified. Existing law prohibits a California corporation that provides electronic communication services or remote computing services to the general public from complying with an out-of-state subpoena, warrant, wiretap order, pen register trap and trace order, other legal process, or request by a law enforcement agent or entity seeking records that would reveal the identity of the customers using those services, data stored by, or on behalf of, the customer, the customer's usage of those services, the recipient or destination of communications sent to or from those customers, or the content of those communications, unless the out-of-state subpoena, warrant, wiretap order, pen register trap and trace order, other legal process, or request from law enforcement includes the affidavit or declaration described above. This bill would extend those provisions to also apply to a California corporation that provides financial services, as defined, to the general public. By expanding the situations in which a declaration under penalty of perjury is required, this bill would expand the scope of the crime of perjury and impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would authorize the Attorney General to commence an action to enforce these provisions, as specified, and would authorize the court to assess a statutory penalty of $10,000 for a first violation, and $15,000 for a 2nd or subsequent violation, against any person or entity found to have intentionally, knowingly, willingly, or recklessly complied with or provided information in response to an inquiry, investigation, subpoena, or summons regarding legally protected health care activity in violation of these 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 makes it a crime for a person to operate or use an unmanned aerial vehicle, remote-piloted aircraft, or drone at the scene of an emergency for the purpose of viewing the scene or emergency or military personnel, and thereby impede the emergency or military personnel, in the performance of their duties in coping with the emergency. Existing law excuses a local public entity or public employee from liability for damage to an unmanned aircraft or unmanned aircraft system, if the damage was caused while the local public entity or public employee of a local public entity was providing, and the unmanned aircraft or unmanned aircraft system was interfering with, the operation, support, or enabling of any emergency service, as specified. Existing law makes everyone responsible for an injury occasioned to another by their want of ordinary care or skill in the management of their property or person, as provided. This bill would prohibit a person from operating or using an unmanned aerial vehicle, remote-piloted aircraft, or drone to knowingly or recklessly interfere with, among other things, a wildfire suppression or law enforcement or emergency response efforts related to a wildfire suppression. The bill would authorize the Attorney General or a county counsel or city attorney to bring civil action to enforce the prohibition and authorize a prevailing plaintiff to recover civil penalties, injunctive relief, or reasonable attorney's fees and costs, as specified.
Existing law generally punishes the willful disobedience of a court order as contempt of court by imprisonment in a county jail for a term not exceeding 6 months, a fine not exceeding $1,000, or both that imprisonment and fine. Existing law makes the willful and knowing violation of specified protective orders or stay-away court orders punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one year, by a fine of not more than $1,000, or by both that imprisonment and fine for a first offense, and makes a 2nd or subsequent conviction for a violation of these specified protective orders or stay-away court orders occurring within 7 years of a prior conviction and involving an act of violence or credible threat of violence punishable as either a misdemeanor or a felony. If a violation of specified protective orders or stay-away court orders results in a physical injury, the individual is required to be in a county jail for at least 48 hours, whether a fine or imprisonment is imposed, or the sentence suspended. This bill would make a willful and knowing violation of specified criminal protective orders or stay-away orders punishable as either a misdemeanor or a felony if the subject of the criminal protective order was charged with, or convicted of, a felony for the conduct upon which the criminal protective order was based. The bill would make a second or subsequent conviction for a violation of specified protective orders or stay-away orders a felony. If a violation of specified protective orders or stay-away orders alleges a physical injury, the bill would require the court to consider the violation of the protective order or stay-away order and alleged injury when considering the seriousness of the offense charged and the protection of the public for purposes of setting, reducing, or denying bail. By increasing the punishment for a 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.
Existing law establishes procedures for a judge to disqualify themselves from a case. Under existing law, if a judge who should disqualify themselves refuses or fails to do so, a party may file with the clerk a written verified statement objecting to the hearing or trial before the judge and setting forth the facts constituting grounds for disqualification of the judge. Existing law requires copies of the statement to be served on each party and personally served on the judge alleged to be disqualified or on their clerk, provided that the judge is present in the courthouse or in chambers. This bill would require the statement to be served during regular business hours on the judge alleged to be disqualified at the courthouse in which the judge is sitting. The bill would, in addition to the clerk, permit service of the statement on the designee of the clerk of the court, provided that the judge is present in the courthouse or in chambers.
Existing law generally provides for the regulation of law enforcement agencies and requires specified law enforcement agencies to maintain policies on, among other things, use of force, hate crimes, and gun violence restraining orders. Existing law requires the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training to establish and keep updated a field training officer course relating to competencies of the field training program and police training program that addresses how to interact with persons with certain conditions. This bill would make it unlawful for a law enforcement officer to deny, delay, obstruct, or fail to facilitate access to medical evaluation or treatment for an individual under law enforcement control, but who is not in the custody of, or detained by, the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, if it is safe and reasonable to provide access to treatment and a medical professional has been requested or is present and is willing to render care to the individual. If access to medical evaluation or treatment is denied or delayed when a medical professional is present and is willing to assist, the bill would require law enforcement to document the basis of the denial within 72 hours of the incident, as specified. The bill would authorize administrative discipline, including suspension or termination, against a law enforcement officer who violates those provisions. By creating a new crime and by increasing the duties on local law enforcement relating to reporting, 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 with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Existing law makes it unlawful to dump waste matter in certain locations, such as upon a public or private highway or road, upon private property without the consent of the owner, or in or upon a public park or other public property, as specified. Existing law also makes it unlawful to place, deposit, or dump rocks, concrete, asphalt, or dirt in certain locations, as specified. A person violating these provisions is guilty of an infraction, as specified. Existing law makes a violation of these provisions in commercial quantities, as defined, a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment in a county jail and by a fine, as specified. Under existing law, a private owner is not restricted in the use of their own private property, unless the placing, depositing, or dumping of the waste matter on the property creates a public health and safety hazard, a public nuisance, or a fire hazard, as determined by a local health or fire department or the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. This bill would make it a crime to transport waste matter, rocks, concrete, asphalt, dirt, or other construction debris for the purpose of placing, depositing, or dumping it in the locations described above. The bill would increase the maximum fine to $5000 for violating these provisions a 4th or subsequent time. The bill would also make it unlawful to transport for the purpose of placing, depositing, or dumping waste matter, rocks, concrete, asphalt, dirt or other construction debris in commercial quantities, as defined, in the locations described above. The bill would specify that the fact that a person is operating a vehicle with actual or apparent rocks, concrete, asphalt, dirt, or other construction debris in their vehicle does not in itself constitute reasonable suspicion to stop or detain the person, or probable cause to arrest the person. For a person who violates these provisions in commercial quantities in excess of 25 cubic yards, the bill would make that violation a misdemeanor punishable in a county jail for not more than one year and by a fine, as specified. For commercial quantities in excess of 50 cubic yards, the bill would make a violation punishable as a misdemeanor or a felony, as specified. By expanding the application of a crime and creating new crimes, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would specify that a private owner or a person with the owner's permission is prohibited from placing, depositing, dumping, or transporting waste matter, rocks, concrete, asphalt, dirt, or construction debris on their property if the activity requires a permit or license from a state or local agency and one was not obtained, or creates a public health and safety hazard, a public nuisance, or a fire hazard, as determined by specified entities. The bill would prohibit a person from being charged with dumping commercial quantities under these provisions if it was completed during the course of the person's employment and at the direction of their employer, 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.
