Issue · Criminal Justice

Criminal Justice (Judges)

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

Total bills
16
2025-2026 Regular Session
Top supporter
Anna Caballero
100% support rate
Top opponent
Heath Flora
0% support rate
Ranked legislators
10
5 support · 5 oppose
Key legislators

Who's moving judges in California

Legislators moving judges in California
Legislator Party Stance Support rate Votes
Anna Caballero
Anna Caballero Senate · District 14
D
Strong +
100% 5
Joaquin Arambula
Joaquin Arambula House · District 31
D
Strong +
100% 5
Celeste Rodriguez
Celeste Rodriguez House · District 43
D
Strong +
100% 3
Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Rebecca Bauer-Kahan House · District 16
D
Strong +
100% 3
Steve Padilla
Steve Padilla Senate · District 18
D
Strong +
100% 3
Heath Flora
Heath Flora House · District 9
R
Strong −
0% 4
Michelle Rodriguez
Michelle Rodriguez House · District 53
D
Strong −
0% 3
Phillip Chen
Phillip Chen House · District 59
R
Strong −
0% 3
Tri Ta
Tri Ta House · District 70
R
Strong −
20% 5
Juan Alanis
Juan Alanis House · District 22
R
Oppose
25% 8
Showing 1–10 of 16 bills

All criminal justice bills

in committee · California · Assembly May 14, 2026

AB 2357: Courts: mental health pilot program.

Existing law, the Trial Jury Selection and Management Act, governs the selection of jurors and formation of trial juries for civil and criminal cases in all trial courts of the state. Existing law requires the judge in a criminal action or proceeding alleging a violent felony, prior to discharging the jury, to provide specified information to trial jurors regarding mental health awareness, including information about stress relief and symptoms that may be experienced following exposure to trauma. This bill would authorize the County of Santa Cruz and two other counties, selected by the Judicial Council, to conduct a pilot program for the provision of no-cost mental health services to jurors and alternate jurors following the receipt of a verdict in a criminal action or proceeding alleging a violent felony, as defined. The bill would require the Judicial Council to enter into a memorandum of understanding with the behavioral health directors of the participating counties for the purposes of providing the above-described mental health services, and would require the memorandum of understanding to include, among other things, the number of no-cost mental health sessions available to jurors. The bill would require the participating counties to terminate the pilot program no later than January 1, 2034, and would require the counties to report specified information regarding the pilot program to the Judicial Council. The bill would require the Judicial Council to provide a report to the Legislature no later than July 1, 2035, regarding the pilot program, and would require the report to include the number of jurors who were offered mental health resources pursuant to this program and recommendations for improving outreach and access to mental health services for jurors. The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2036.
Sub-Topics Judges Mental Health
signed · California · Senate Aug 27, 2026

SB 1100: Grand juries: final reports.

Under existing law, a grand jury is a body of the required number of persons chosen from the citizens of the county to serve before a court of competent jurisdiction, and sworn to inquire of public offenses that are committed or triable within the county. Existing law requires each grand jury, no later than the end of each fiscal or calendar year, to submit to the presiding judge of the superior court a final report of its findings and recommendations that pertain to county government matters. Existing law requires one copy of each final report and its responses to be placed on file with the clerk of the court who shall immediately forward the report and responses to the State Archivist. This bill would instead require the clerk to compile all final reports and responses issued during the grand jury's term of service and to transfer the reports and responses to the State Archivist within 6 months of the end of the grand jury's term of service, as specified. The bill would specify that the clerk is not required to create new or consolidated documents.
Sub-Topics Courts Judges
passed both · California · Assembly Aug 28, 2026

AB 2262: Courts: disqualification of judges.

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.
Sub-Topics Courts Judges
passed · California · Assembly Aug 13, 2026

AB 2235: The Judicial Home Security Act.

Existing law, the California Public Records Act, requires state and local agencies to make their records available for public inspection, unless an exemption from disclosure applies. Existing law authorizes a person who faces violence, harassment, or threats of violence from the public because of their work for a public entity to apply to the Secretary of State for the purposes of enabling state and local agencies to respond to requests for public records without disclosing a program participant's residence address contained in any public record and otherwise provide for confidentiality of identity for that person, subject to specified conditions. Under existing law, any person who makes a false statement in an application is guilty of a misdemeanor. This bill would require the Attorney General to establish the Judicial Home Security Program under which a judicial officer, including an imminent, current, or former superior court judge or district court judge, or an adult household member of a judicial officer who is domiciled in California may request their home address in public records to be shielded or substituted with an alternate mailing address, as specified. The bill would establish the Judicial Home Security Program Fund in the General Fund and would authorize moneys in the fund to be made available for the administration of the program upon appropriation by the Legislature. The bill would require the Attorney General to approve an application to the program if it is filed in the manner and on the form prescribed by the Attorney General and contains prescribed information, including documentation showing the household contains an individual who is a judicial officer and a signed statement that the applicant fears for their safety or the safety of a household member of the applicant due to the employment of the judicial officer. The bill would require the application to be dated and signed, and would make knowingly providing false or incorrect information in the application a misdemeanor. The bill would require the Attorney General to commence accepting applications under the program on April 1, 2027. The bill would require the Attorney General to create, maintain, and update monthly a publicly available list that includes the name, county of residence, and designated alternate mailing address of each current program participant. The bill would also require the Attorney General to create, maintain, and update monthly a publicly available list that includes former participants who are no longer in the program. The bill would require, when disclosing or releasing records or information that would otherwise contain the home address of a program participant in any format or medium, a state or local agency to substitute the participant's alternate mailing address for any reference to the participant's home address. The bill would require, when disclosing or releasing records or information that would otherwise contain the situs of the home address of a program participant in any format or medium, a county assessor's office to substitute the program participant's alternate mailing address for the situs of the home address on assessment rolls, maps, property ownership statements and records, and any other records containing the home address of a program participant. The bill would require, when disclosing or releasing, in any format or medium, records or information that would otherwise contain the situs of the home address of a program participant who requests shielding, a county assessor's office and a county recorder's office to shield the participant's public record, including real property deeds, real estate records, and any other records containing the home address of a program participant. In this regard, the bill would require a program participant to submit a request containing a list of documents to be shielded, a sworn statement attesting to the accuracy of the information provided, and payment of a fee, as specified. The bill would authorize a program participant to submit a request to update the list of documents to be shielded, a specified. The bill would require the county assessor's office and county recorder's office to validate and shield any requested records within 5 business days of receipt of a request for shielding. The bill would authorize making any original documents available only to specified persons or in specified circumstances. The bill would prohibit the disclosure of a participant's home address by the Attorney General and state and local agencies, except in specified circumstances. The bill would prohibit a person or organization from publicly posting or displaying the home address of a program participant who has made a written demand of that person or organization, including on the internet, and would prohibit a third-party data broker or aggregator from selling, licensing, trading, purchasing, transferring, releasing, or otherwise sharing in any format or medium, the home address of a program participant, including on the internet, except as specified. The bill would authorize the Attorney General to adopt guidance to facilitate the administration of the act by state and local agencies. The bill would define terms for its purposes. By imposing new duties on local agencies, expanding the scope of the crime of perjury, and creating a crime, this bill would create a state-mandated local program. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. The California Constitution requires local agencies, for the purpose of ensuring public access to the meetings of public bodies and the writings of public officials and agencies, to comply with a statutory enactment that amends or enacts laws relating to public records or open meetings and contains findings demonstrating that the enactment furthers the constitutional requirements relating to this purpose. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. 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.
Sub-Topics Courts Judges
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.
Sub-Topics Courts Judges
signed · California · Assembly Aug 20, 2026

ACR 159: Relative to indigent defense.

This measure would affirm the fundamental importance of indigent defense to due process, equal justice, and democratic governance, recognize public defenders as essential protectors of constitutional rights and the rule of law, and encourage the development of statewide approaches to indigent defense.
Sub-Topics Judges
passed both · California · Senate Aug 21, 2026

SB 1285: Juvenile court: procedure.

Existing law authorizes a judge of the juvenile court in which a petition was filed to dismiss the petition, or set aside the findings and dismiss the petition, if the court finds that the interests of justice and the welfare of the minor require that dismissal, or if the court finds that the minor is not in need of treatment or rehabilitation, regardless of whether the minor is, at the time of the order, a ward or dependent child of the court. This bill would clarify that an adjudication dismissed pursuant to that provision be deemed to have not occurred and prohibit a person from suffering any future adverse questions based on an adjudication dismissed pursuant to that provision. The bill would specify that a dismissal of a sustained petition pursuant to that provision is deemed to include both dismissal of a petition and a setting aside of any findings.
signed · California · Assembly Jun 30, 2026

AB 2286: Criminal procedure: attorney visits: medical settings.

Existing law requires a person arrested to be taken before a magistrate without delay and, in any event, within 48 hours after arrest, not including weekends and holidays, as specified. Existing law allows an attorney to visit a prisoner after their arrest, as specified. Under existing law, an officer in charge of the prisoner who willfully refuses or neglects to allow an attorney to visit that prisoner is liable for criminal and civil penalties, as provided. This bill would clarify that the above provisions regarding criminal and civil penalties for officers apply if a prisoner is in a jail, prison, or medical setting. The bill would make other technical changes, as provided.
Sub-Topics Corrections Judges
passed · California · Assembly Aug 13, 2026

AB 1662: Misdemeanor diversion.

Existing law authorizes a judge in a case where a misdemeanor is being prosecuted, over the objection of the prosecuting attorney, to offer diversion to the defendant. Existing law prohibits this type of diversion when, among other things, the current charged offense is willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly following or willfully and maliciously harassing another person while making a credible threat toward that person, as specified. Existing law requires the clerk of a court, in which a person was convicted of a violation of the Vehicle Code or other specified provisions, to prepare within 5 days after conviction and immediately forward to the Department of Motor Vehicles an abstract of the record of the court covering the case in which the person was convicted. This bill would require the court, if the court grants diversion to a defendant who, if they had been convicted, would have had an abstract of record forwarded to the department pursuant to the above provisions, to instead direct that the prosecuting attorney ensure notice of the arrest or incident is provided to the department, as specified. By increasing the duties on local officials, 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, 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.
Sub-Topics Courts Judges
passed · California · Assembly Aug 13, 2026

AB 1245: State contracts: certification process: forced labor and human trafficking.

Existing law requires a contract entered into by any state agency for the procurement or laundering of apparel, garments, or corresponding accessories, or the procurement of equipment, materials, or supplies, other than procurement related to a public works contract, to require that a contractor certify that nothing furnished to the state pursuant to the contract has been laundered or produced by certain types of labor, including forced labor, as defined. Existing law makes any person who falsely certifies pursuant to these provisions guilty of a misdemeanor. This bill would, for a contract entered into or renewed on or after January 1, 2027, with an estimated value that exceeds $550,000, revise the above contracting requirements to also require a contractor to certify that the contract complies with specified requirements relating to human trafficking, including certain prohibitions on contractors, contractor employees, subcontractors, subcontractor employees, and their agents. The bill would revise the definition of forced labor to mean knowingly providing or obtaining labor or services of a person by, among other things, threats of serious harm to, or physical restraint against, that person or another person. This bill would require contractors and subcontractors to notify employees of specified prohibited activities and the actions that may be taken against them for violations. The bill would provide that a contractor is ineligible for, and shall not bid on, or submit a proposal for, a contract under these provisions if the contractor has failed to certify its compliance. The bill would also require a contractor to exercise due diligence in ensuring that its subcontractors comply with those requirements, including requiring each subcontractor to sign a certification. By expanding the scope of a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would, for a contract that has an estimated value that exceeds $550,000, require, before a contract or subcontract is awarded, a proposed contractor or proposed subcontractor to provide a certification to the contracting officer or contractor, as applicable, that states the contractor or subcontractor has implemented a compliance plan, as specified, and has conducted due diligence that either (1) to the best of the contractor's or subcontractor's knowledge and belief, certain parties have not engaged in any specified prohibited activities or (2) if the contractor or subcontractor is aware of abuses relating to the specified prohibited activities, then certain parties have taken the appropriate remedial and referral actions. This bill would require a contractor or subcontractor to take specified actions to ensure compliance with the above-described provisions, including requiring the contractor or subcontractor to disclose to the contracting officer and the state agency with oversight information sufficient to identify the nature and extent of a violation of a prohibited activity. The bill would specify certain actions a contractor would be required to take if a contractor, contractor employee, subcontractor, subcontractor employee, or agent violates these provisions or specified provisions, including, among others, notifying its employees of the actions that will be taken against the employee or agent for violations. Existing law authorizes certain sanctions to be imposed if a contractor knew or should have known that the apparel, garments, corresponding accessories, equipment, materials, or supplies furnished to the state were laundered or produced in violation of specified conditions, including, among others, voiding the contract under which the prohibited apparel, garments, or corresponding accessories, equipment, materials, or supplies were laundered or provided at the option of the state agency and removing the contractor from the bidder's list for a period not to exceed 360 days. This bill would, for a contract entered into or renewed on or after January 1, 2027, with an estimated value that exceeds $550,000, authorize additional sanctions, including, among others, requiring a contractor to remove a contractor employee from the performance of the contract, requiring the contractor to terminate a subcontractor, and suspending contract payments until the contractor has taken appropriate remedial action. The bill would also specify that these requirements govern contracts and subcontracts entered into by a state agency, regardless of place of performance. Existing law authorizes a contractor to request a hearing before an administrative law judge when sanctions are imposed. Existing law requires the administrative law judge to consider any measures the contractor has taken to ensure compliance with the above-described provisions and authorizes the administrative law judge to waive any or all sanctions if it is determined that the contractor has acted in good faith. This bill would, for a contract entered into or renewed on or after January 1, 2027, with an estimated value that exceeds $550,000, authorize the administrative law judge to additionally consider mitigating factors and aggravating factors, as specified. Existing law authorizes a state agency that investigates a complaint against a contractor for violation of the above-described provisions to limit its investigation to evaluating the information provided by the person or entity submitting the complaint and information provided by the contractor. This bill would, for a contract entered into or renewed on or after January 1, 2027, with an estimated value that exceeds $550,000, authorize the state agency to limit its investigation to credible information. The bill would require the contracting officer, upon receipt of credible information regarding a violation of specified provisions, to promptly notify the state agency with oversight, the agency debarring and suspending official, and law enforcement officials with jurisdiction over the alleged offense, as specified. The bill would authorize the contracting officer to direct the contractor to take specific steps to abate the alleged violation or enforcement of the requirements of its compliance plan. 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.
Showing 1 to 10 of 16 bills
1 2 Next