Issue · Criminal Justice

Criminal Justice

Every criminal justice bill, vote, and legislator stance in California, automatically classified by Maddy, our AI policy reader.

Total bills
50
2025-2026 Regular Session
Top supporter
Anna Caballero
92% support rate
Top opponent
Phillip Chen
8% support rate
Ranked legislators
10
5 support · 5 oppose
Key legislators

Who's moving criminal justice in California

Legislators moving criminal justice in California
Legislator Party Stance Support rate Votes
Anna Caballero
Anna Caballero Senate · District 14
D
Strong +
92% 732
Joaquin Arambula
Joaquin Arambula House · District 31
D
Strong +
92% 528
Celeste Rodriguez
Celeste Rodriguez House · District 43
D
Strong +
91% 364
Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Rebecca Bauer-Kahan House · District 16
D
Strong +
91% 467
Aisha Wahab
Aisha Wahab Senate · District 10
D
Strong +
90% 765
Phillip Chen
Phillip Chen House · District 59
R
Strong −
8% 316
Heath Flora
Heath Flora House · District 9
R
Strong −
11% 275
Brian Jones
Brian Jones Senate · District 40
R
Strong −
11% 398
Carl DeMaio
Carl DeMaio House · District 75
R
Strong −
12% 468
Ali Macedo
Ali Macedo House · District 33
R
Strong −
12% 532
Showing 11–20 of 50 bills

All criminal justice bills

passed both · California · Assembly Aug 28, 2026

AB 2318: Law enforcement: facilitating medical care.

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.
passed both · California · Assembly Aug 28, 2026

AB 1743: Firearms.

Existing law requires law enforcement agencies to enter each firearm into the Department of Justice Automated Firearms System that has been reported stolen, lost, found, recovered, held for safekeeping, surrendered, relinquished, or under observation. Existing law requires these law enforcement agencies to report to the Department of Justice all available information necessary to identify and trace the history of all recovered firearms that are illegally possessed, have been used in a crime, or are suspected of having been used in a crime, within 7 calendar days of obtaining the information. Existing law requires that the information collected be maintained by the department for a period of not less than 10 years, and to be available, under guidelines set forth by the Attorney General, for academic and policy research purposes. Existing law also requires the department to, on an ongoing basis, analyze the information collected for patterns and trends relating to recovered firearms that have been illegally possessed, used in a crime, or suspected to have been used in a crime, including the leading sources and origins of those firearms. This bill would clarify that the information relied on by the department for its analysis of patterns and trends be available, upon request, to any California town, city, county, or state government agency, the California State University, the University of California, or specified private postsecondary educational institutions in California, under conditions and format options set forth by the Attorney General, as specified.
passed · California · Senate Aug 27, 2026

SB 1013: Automated license plate recognition systems.

Existing law prohibits a public agency, which includes the state, a city, a county, a city and county, or any agency or political subdivision of the state, a city, a county, or a city and county, including, but not limited to, a law enforcement agency, from selling, sharing, or transferring automated license plate recognition (ALPR) information, except to another public agency, and only as otherwise permitted by law. Existing law defines ALPR information as information or data collected through the use of an ALPR system. This bill would provide that "public agency" does not include a transportation agency, a public transit operator, department of transportation, public works department, or campus transportation agency, as specified, a public agency or contracted parking operator when engaging in specified activities in a parking facility, a state agency operating specified parking facilities, or the State Air Resources Board. The bill would require a public agency that accesses or provides access to ALPR information to maintain a record of that access, as provided. The bill would, beginning January 1, 2027, require new, updated, renewed, extended, expansions of, or addendums of contractual agreements with ALPR vendors, manufacturers, or suppliers to mandate that no default access is provided to any national ALPR database and that an agency's collected scans are by default not accessible to any other agency, except as specified, and would impose new requirements on sharing between California state law enforcement agencies. This bill would authorize a law enforcement agency to use ALPR information only for purposes of locating vehicles or persons when either are reasonably suspected of being involved in the commission of a public offense or locating an individual who has been reported as missing to a law enforcement agency. The bill, as of January 1, 2028, would require a public agency to archive all ALPR information that has been held for more than 60 days within 14 days, unless that ALPR information is retained in the evidence file of an active investigation or criminal proceeding or matches information on an authorized hot list, as defined, and retain ALPR information that becomes part of an investigation or criminal proceeding in the evidence file as long as the evidence file is required to be held by state law or court order. The bill would prohibit a public agency from querying any archived information except pursuant to a warrant, as specified. By imposing new requirements on public agencies, which include local agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law defines an ALPR operator as a person that operates an ALPR system, which does not include a transportation agency. Existing law defines an ALPR end-user as a person that accesses or uses an ALPR system, which does not include, among other things, a transportation agency. This bill would additionally exclude from the definitions of "ALPR operator" and "ALPR end-user" a public transit operator, department of transportation, public works department, campus transportation agency, or an airport or airport operator, as provided. The bill would also exclude from the definition of "ALPR operator" the Department of General Services and its operators when engaging in specified activities in a parking facility and would exclude from the definition of "ALPR end-user" a state agency operating specified parking facilities and the State Air Resources Board. Existing law requires an ALPR operator and ALPR end-user to maintain reasonable security procedures and practices, including operational, administrative, technical, and physical safeguards, to protect ALPR information from unauthorized access, destruction, use, modification, or disclosure. This bill would require those security procedures and practices to include safeguards for managing which employees can see the data from their systems, as specified, and requiring data security training and data privacy training for all employees that access ALPR information. Existing law requires an ALPR operator and ALPR end-user to implement a usage and privacy policy that includes, among other things, a description of the job title or other designation of the employees and independent contractors who are authorized to access and use ALPR information. This bill would require the usage and privacy policy to identify what purpose employees and independent contractors access and use ALPR information for. The bill would also require the Department of Justice to, beginning October 1, 2029, and contingent upon an appropriation of sufficient funds, conduct annual random audits on a public agency that is an ALPR operator or ALPR end-user to determine whether they have implemented and are adhering to that usage and privacy policy. Existing law requires an ALPR operator that accesses or provides access to ALPR information to require that ALPR information only be used for the authorized purposes described in the usage and privacy policy and to maintain a record of that access that includes, among other things, the purpose for accessing the information. This bill would instead require that record of access maintained by the ALPR operator to include a brief, accurate, specific, and plain language statement describing the purpose for accessing ALPR information. 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. 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.
passed both · California · Senate Aug 27, 2026

SB 1173: Jury instructions: lesser related offenses.

Existing law authorizes the finder of fact in a criminal prosecution to find the defendant guilty of an offense that is necessarily included in the charged offense. Case law requires the trial court to instruct the jury that it must find the defendant guilty of a necessarily included offense if there is substantial evidence that the defendant is guilty of the necessarily included offense. This bill would require the court, if requested by a defendant, to instruct the jury on a lesser offense, which is closely related to the offense charged, if the court finds that the defendant has relied on a theory of defense consistent with a conviction for the lesser offense, the evidence of the lesser offense is relevant to and admitted for the purpose of establishing guilt of the charged offense, and a basis exists on which the jury could find the offense to be less than charged. The bill would also authorize the judge to find the defendant guilty of the lesser offense if there is no jury. The bill would require the defendant to provide notice to the prosecution of the intent to seek the above-described jury instruction, as specified.
passed both · California · Senate Aug 27, 2026

SB 936: Nitrous oxide: sales.

Existing law makes it a misdemeanor to possess nitrous oxide with the intent of inhaling it for specified purposes, including to cause intoxication. Existing law also makes it a misdemeanor to sell nitrous oxide to any person under 18 years of age. Existing law makes it a misdemeanor to dispense nitrous oxide to a person and knowing that the person will use it for specified prohibited purposes, if that person then causes death or great bodily injury to themselves or another person. Under existing law, the Cigarette and Tobacco Products Licensing Act of 2003, the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA) administers and enforces a statewide program to license manufacturers, importers, distributors, wholesalers, and retailers of cigarettes and tobacco products. Existing law specifically requires a retailer, distributor, or wholesaler, as defined, to hold a license from the CDTFA to engage in the sale of cigarettes or tobacco products. Existing law subjects these licenses to suspension or revocation for violations of existing law. Existing law imposes specified noticing and posting requirements for retailer licenses that are revoked. A violation of these provisions is a misdemeanor. This bill would, except as specifically exempted, prohibit the sale and distribution of a nitrous oxide container that is capable of holding more than 8 grams of nitrous oxide or from which an individual may directly inhale nitrous oxide. The bill would also prohibit the sale and distribution of a nitrous oxide that has, or is marketed as having, the taste or smell of any food. The bill would prohibit knowingly selling or distributing a device that allows an individual to inhale nitrous oxide from the container or hold nitrous oxide for the purposes of inhalation. The bill would punish a violation of these provisions as an infraction, as specified. The bill would also authorize a court to suspend a business license if the business has a prior conviction for violating these prohibitions, and to revoke a license to sell tobacco products if the business has 2 prior convictions for violating these prohibitions. The bill would make any person, distributor, or business found to have violated these prohibitions liable for all reasonable costs incurred by a public agency in the investigation, inspection, seizure, storage, transportation, handling, venting, abatement, disposal, or destruction of nitrous oxide products, nitrous oxide containers, inhalation devices, or related materials involved in the violation, as specified. This bill would prohibit a person that is engaged in the business of selling cigarettes or tobacco products in this state from possessing, storing, owning, or selling nitrous oxide, in violation of the criminal provisions outlined above, at any site where cigarettes and tobacco products are stored or sold. The bill would authorize the CDTFA to seize nitrous oxide products, as prescribed. The bill would subject a violator to civil penalties in amounts depending on the aggregate retail value of the seized nitrous oxide and the number of violations within 5 years of the first violation. The bill would require the deposit of collected civil penalties in the Cigarette and Tobacco Products Compliance Fund. The bill would also subject a violator who commits a 2nd violation to license suspension and who commits a 3rd violation to license revocation, as prescribed. This bill would establish procedures for the CDTFA to follow for a court-ordered revocation. The bill would require the CDTFA to assess a $250 civil penalty for each revoked license and to deposit collected civil penalties into the fund, to be made available to the department, upon appropriation by the Legislature, for purposes of administering the bill. The bill would authorize a licensee to apply for a new license at the previously revoked location 6 months after the date of revocation and would authorize the CDTFA, at its discretion, to issue a new license. The bill would apply these noticing and posting requirements to a retailer subject to a court-ordered revocation pursuant to the bill. The California Constitution provides for the establishment of the State Board of Equalization, which, before July 1, 2017, had primary responsibility for most of the state's duties, powers, and responsibilities regarding the administration of taxes and fees. Existing law, on July 1, 2017, transferred to the CDTFA various duties, powers, and responsibilities of the State Board of Equalization, including administration of the Cigarette and Tobacco Products Licensing Act of 2003, as specified. This bill would change references in the provisions of the Cigarette and Tobacco Products Licensing Act of 2003 amended by this bill from the "State Board of Equalization" to the "California Department of Tax and Fee Administration" to reflect the transfer of the board's duties, powers, and responsibilities to the CDTFA. Because this bill would create new crimes, it 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.
passed both · California · Senate Aug 27, 2026

SB 747: Civil rights: deprivation of federal constitutional rights, privileges, and immunities.

Under existing law, the Tom Bane Civil Rights Act (act) , if a person or persons, whether or not acting under color of law, interferes or attempts to interfere, by threats, intimidation, or coercion, with the exercise or enjoyment by any individual or individuals of rights secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or of the rights secured by the Constitution or laws of this state, the Attorney General, or any district attorney or city attorney, is authorized to bring a civil action for injunctive and other appropriate equitable relief in the name of the people of the State of California, in order to protect the exercise or enjoyment of the right or rights secured. Under that act, an individual may also institute and prosecute in their own name and on their own behalf a civil action for damages, as described, for any resulting interference or attempt at interference of the individual's exercise or enjoyment of rights secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States or this state. The act authorizes the court to award the petitioner or plaintiff reasonable attorney's fees in addition to any damages, injunction, or other equitable relief awarded in these civil actions (attorney's fees authorization) . Existing federal law provides that every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any state, territory, or the District of Columbia, subjects or causes to be subjected any United States citizen or other person within the jurisdiction to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, is liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except as provided. This bill would also provide that every natural person, as defined, who, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, as defined, subjects or causes to be subjected any citizen of this state or any person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the United States Constitution, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except as specified. The bill would apply the aforementioned attorney's fees authorization, except as specified, to any action brought under these provisions. The bill would authorize a court, in its discretion, to also award costs, except as specified, to the prevailing plaintiff in any action brought under these provisions. This bill would authorize a defendant in an action brought under these provisions to assert and receive the benefit of a defense of absolute or qualified immunity only to the same extent as a person sued under certain federal provisions under like circumstances, as specified, and would specify that nothing in these provisions is to be construed to waive or abrogate any defense of sovereign immunity otherwise available to a party, as specified. The bill would prohibit any civil action brought under these provisions from being commenced later than 2 years after the date that the cause of action accrues. The bill would make its provisions severable. The bill would specify that these provisions apply retroactively to March 1, 2025, as provided. This bill would declare the intent of the Legislature in enacting these provisions. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
passed both · California · Assembly Aug 26, 2026

AB 1806: Department of Justice.

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.
passed both · California · Assembly Aug 26, 2026

AB 2257: Corrections: jail administrators.

Existing law authorizes a board of supervisors of any county to, by resolution, establish a department of corrections, to be headed by an officer appointed by the board, which has jurisdiction over all county functions, personnel, and facilities, or so many as the board names in its resolution, relating to institutional punishment, care, treatment, and rehabilitation of prisoners, including, but not limited to, the county jail and industrial farms and road camps, their functions and personnel. Existing law, except as specified, requires the sheriff to take charge of and be the sole and exclusive authority to keep the county jail and the prisoners in it, as specified, and generally imposes requirements and duties on sheriffs for the keeping of jails. This bill would authorize a board of supervisors to, by resolution, establish the position of jail administrator and impose procedures for the nomination and confirmation or denial of a candidate for the position. The bill would prescribe the powers and duties of jail administrators. The bill would provide that the sheriff retains specified authority with respect to the jail administrator, including the authority to remove the jail administrator, as specified. The bill would also revise the provision requiring the sheriff to take charge of and be the sole and exclusive authority to keep the county jail and the incarcerated persons to state that the provision does not apply in counties that have appointed a jail administrator pursuant to the authority described above. The bill would also specify that "sheriff" includes a jail administrator for the purposes of requirements and duties imposed on sheriffs for the keeping of jails, as specified.
passed both · California · Assembly Aug 26, 2026

AB 2393: False imprisonment: false arrest: remedies.

Existing law prohibits false imprisonment, defined as the unlawful violation of the personal liberty of another. Existing law provides that the measure of damages for the breach of an obligation not arising from a contract is the amount that will compensate for all the detriment proximately caused thereby, whether it could have been anticipated or not, except as expressly provided otherwise. This bill would authorize a prevailing plaintiff in an action based on false imprisonment or false arrest to elect to receive, in lieu of actual damages, $10,000 for each of specified acts committed by the defendant in the perpetration of the false imprisonment or false arrest, as specified. The bill would make defendants liable for the amounts described above for an incident of false imprisonment or false arrest jointly and severally liable and would limit the aggregate award to a person under the above provisions to $250,000 per incident of false imprisonment or false arrest. The bill would exempt causes of action brought against specified parties from the above provisions. The bill would make related findings and declarations and would make its provisions severable.
passed both · California · Senate Aug 26, 2026

SB 1237: Civil Rights Department.

Existing law establishes the Civil Rights Department to administer and enforce various laws relating to civil rights, including the California Fair Employment and Housing Act. Existing law requires certain private employers to annually submit a pay data report to the department that includes, among other information, the number of employees by race, ethnicity, and sex, as specified, and, within each job category, for each combination of race, ethnicity, and sex, the median and mean hourly rate. Upon request from the Civil Rights Department, existing law requires a court to impose a civil penalty not to exceed $100 per employee upon any employer who fails to file the required report and not to exceed $200 per employee upon any employer for a subsequent failure to file the required report. This bill would increase the penalty for subsequent failures to file the report described above to an amount not to exceed $1,000 per employee. Existing law authorizes the department to develop, publish on an annual basis, and publicize aggregate reports based on the data obtained pursuant to their authority under this section, provided that the aggregate reports are reasonably calculated to prevent the association of any data with any individual business or person. This bill would require the department to annually publish the number of total pay data reports submitted, as provided and specified.
Showing 11 to 20 of 50 bills
Previous 1 2 3 5 Next