Existing law provides that a tenant is guilty of unlawful detainer if the tenant continues to possess the property without permission of the landlord after the tenant defaults on rent or fails to perform a condition or covenant of the lease under which the property is held, among other reasons. Existing law requires a tenant to be served a 3 days' notice in writing to cure a default or perform a condition of the lease, or return possession of the property to the landlord, as specified. This bill, the Tenant Protections for Immigrant Families Act of 2026 (Act) , would, until January 1, 2030, prohibit an owner of residential real property, as defined, from initiating or continuing an unlawful detainer action to evict a tenant whose income, ability to obtain income, or financial support is impacted by immigration enforcement activities until no sooner than 90 days after the tenant or household member's detention-related hardship ends, as specified. The bill would require a court to stay the proceeding of a pending unlawful detainer action against a covered tenant if certain conditions are satisfied, including that the tenant provides the court with specified documentation, such as a signed declaration of detention-related hardship that includes a specified statement, that the tenant or household member suffered a detention-related hardship that prevented them from paying the unpaid rent alleged in the unlawful detainer action. Any person who knowingly provides false information in the declaration of detention-related hardship would be subject to a civil fine of up to $1,500. Under the bill, if a tenant has raised detention-related hardship as an affirmative defense, an owner of residential real property may request an evidentiary hearing regarding the tenant's detention-related hardship stay of the unlawful detainer action, at which the tenant must prove by a preponderance of the evidence their detention-related hardship. The bill would prohibit the owner from charging or collecting any late fees, interest, or other penalties related to the nonpayment of rent by a tenant subject to these provisions. Within 90 days after the end of the detention-related hardship, the bill would require the tenant to either pay all past due rent or enter into a mutually agreed upon payment plan with the owner of the residential real property. For purposes of the Act, this bill would define "immigration enforcement activities" to include any efforts to investigate, enforce, or assist in the investigation or enforcement of any federal immigration law, including any federal criminal immigration law that penalizes a person's presence in, entry or reentry to, or employment in, the United States. The bill would define "detention-related hardship" to mean, among other things, loss of income or financial support by the tenant or household member due to detention, arrest, or ordered removal of a tenant or household member by any federal law enforcement agency. This bill would prohibit a landlord from charging a tenant subject to these provisions fees assessed for the late payment of that rental debt. The bill would prohibit a person from selling or assigning any unpaid debt as a result of detention-related hardship. The bill would prohibit a housing provider or tenant screening company from using an alleged debt as a result of detention-related hardship as a negative factor for the purpose of evaluating a prospective housing application or as the basis for refusing to rent a dwelling unit to an otherwise qualified prospective tenant. The bill would delete similar provisions related to debts as a result of COVID-19 rental debt. The bill would require the Judicial Council to review its existing forms and develop new forms to effectuate these provisions. The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2030.
Under existing law, the State Department of Public Health is responsible for the licensing and regulation of various facilities and settings that provide health care services, as specified. Existing law, the Confidentiality of Medical Information Act prohibits, except to the extent expressly authorized by a patient, enrollee, or subscriber, or as otherwise permitted or required, a provider of health care, health care service plan, contractor, or corporation and its subsidiaries and affiliates from disclosing medical information for immigration enforcement. Existing law requires health care provider entities, as defined, to establish or amend procedures for monitoring, documenting, and receiving visitors to health care provider entities to the extent possible, and prohibits, unless required by state or federal law, a health care provider entity and its personnel from allowing any person access to nonpublic areas of the provider's facilities for immigration enforcement purposes, except as specified. This bill would, among other things, require a health care provider entity to, when there is a patient accompanied by an immigration enforcement officer, verify and document the identities and agencies of the accompanying immigration enforcement officers, to the extent possible. The bill would require a health care provider entity to ask an immigration enforcement officer to step out of the patient's room when discussing any matters pertaining to patient care, or performing any physical examination, or providing any medical care, except as specified, would prohibit an immigration enforcement officer from having any authority to make, influence, or participate in medical decisions on behalf of patient they accompany, and would require the health care provider entity personnel to report a refusal to comply with the requirements of this bill to the health care provider entity management, administration, or legal counsel, who is required to then document the actions, and, to the extent possible, the name and badge number of an immigration enforcement officer. The bill would also prohibit a health care provider entity from using blackout policies when admitting a patient who is accompanied by an immigration enforcement officer, except as specified, and defines blackout policies to mean any policy that is used by health care provider entities to conceal a patient's presence or identity at the entity's facility, including, but not limited to, registering patients under a pseudonym, removing the patient's name from the health care provider entity's directory, or prohibiting personnel from confirming that a patient is in the health care provider entity.
This measure would strongly condemn and denounce mass immigration raids that target immigrant workers and families in California and the engagement of the military in immigration enforcement operations and in response to community protests. This measure would affirm support for safeguarding the rights and safety of all Californians, regardless of immigration status, and support, among other things, the expansion of legal services and emergency response resources to protect workers, children, and families affected by immigration enforcement.
Existing law establishes the California Community Colleges, under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges as one of the 3 segments of public postsecondary education in the state. Existing law establishes uniform residency requirements for purposes of ascertaining the amount of tuition and fees to be paid by students of public postsecondary educational institutions. Existing law requires a student classified as a nonresident to pay nonresident tuition, in addition to other fees required by the institution, except as provided. This bill, the California Community Colleges Access and Continuity for Deported Students Act, would, until January 1, 2030, exempt a community college student from paying nonresident tuition if the student departs the United States on or after January 1, 2025, for specified reasons, was not paying nonresident tuition at the time of departure, provides an attestation of specified information related to the departure, and reenrolls in a community college online education program no later than 3 years from the date the student departed the United States. The bill, until January 1, 2030, would require a deported student, as defined, who resumes in-person education at a community college to be eligible to retain residency status for the purpose of determining tuition and fees, provided the student was previously classified as a resident and eligible for the nonresident tuition exemption at the time of departure, and would require the student to be eligible to apply for financial aid upon reenrollment. To the extent that the bill would impose new duties on community college districts, 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, 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. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law, the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, prohibits various forms of employment and housing discrimination, including various types of discrimination because of national origin. Existing law empowers the Civil Rights Department to investigate and prosecute complaints alleging unlawful practices. Existing labor law also prohibits an employer or other person or entity from engaging in, or to directing another person or entity to engage in, unfair immigration-related practices against a person for exercising specified rights. Existing law defines unfair immigration-related practices for these purposes. Existing law additionally makes it unlawful for an employer to request more or different immigration documents than are required under federal law, to refuse to honor documents tendered that reasonably appear to be genuine, and to take other related actions concerning employee work authorization documents. Existing law authorizes an applicant for employment or an employee who is subject to an unlawful act that is prohibited by these provisions, or a representative of that applicant for employment or employee, to file a complaint with the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement. Existing law establishes specified civil penalties for a violation of these provisions. This bill would require each employee, upon request, to be released by their employer for up to 5 unpaid working days within a 12-month period in order to attend appointments, interviews, adjudications, legal proceedings, detainment, or any other meeting at which the employee's presence is required concerning the employee's immigration status, work authorization, visa status, or any other immigration-related matter, as specified. The bill would also require a postintroductory employee, as defined, whose employment has been terminated due to an inability to provide documentation of proper work authorization, to be immediately reinstated to their former classification without loss in seniority, subject to producing proper work authorization, except as provided. The bill would also require an employer, if the employee demonstrates a need for additional time, to rehire the employee into the next available opening in the employee's former classification, as a new hire without retaining seniority, subject to the employee providing proper work authorization and meeting certain other conditions. This bill would require an employer that is notified that an employee has been detained or incarcerated as a result of pending immigration or deportation proceedings, to place the employee on an unpaid leave of absence for a period pending the employee's release from detainment or incarceration and not to exceed 12 months. If the employee is released and provides appropriate work authorization documentation within the period of the authorized unpaid leave of absence, the bill would require the employer to return the employee to their former job classification without loss of seniority, except as specified. This bill would apply the above requirements to a public or private employer, but would exempt a public or private employer with 25 or fewer employees. The bill would prohibit each public or private employer from disciplining, discharging, or discriminating against an employee because of national origin or immigration status, or solely because the employee is subject to immigration or deportation proceedings, except as required to comply with the law. The bill would prohibit an employee subject to immigration or deportation proceedings from being discharged solely because of those proceedings, so long as the employee is authorized to work in the United States. This bill would provide that its provisions do not invalidate a collective bargaining agreement or a memorandum of understanding that contains a provision addressing rehire or reinstatement rights or leave rights regarding employees who are subject to immigration proceedings, nor does it supersede the seniority provisions of a collective bargaining agreement or a memorandum of understanding. The bill would require the Labor Commissioner to enforce the bill's provisions. This bill would make these provisions inoperative on July 1, 2029, and would repeal them on January 1, 2030.
Existing law requires the court, prior to the acceptance of a plea of guilty or nolo contendere, to advise the defendant that if they are not a citizen, conviction of the crime charged may result in deportation, exclusion from admission to the United States, or denial of naturalization. After January 1, 1978, if the court fails to advise the defendant, as required, and the defendant shows that conviction of the offense to which the defendant pleaded guilty or nolo contendere may have the consequences for the defendant of deportation, exclusion from admission to the United States, or denial of naturalization pursuant to the laws of the United States, the court, on the defendant's motion, is required to vacate the judgment and permit the defendant to withdraw the plea of guilty or nolo contendere, and enter a plea of not guilty. This bill would require the court to give the above-described advisement verbatim and would clarify the advisement to state that if the defendant is not a citizen of the United States, conviction may result in the specified immigration consequences. The bill would state that for a plea accepted prior to January 1, 2026, it is not the intent of the Legislature that a court's failure to provide the advisement verbatim requires vacation of judgment and withdrawal of the plea or constitutes grounds for finding a prior conviction invalid, as specified.
Existing law requires the Attorney General to develop model policies limiting assistance with immigration enforcement to the fullest extent possible consistent with federal and state law at public schools, public libraries, courthouses, specified health facilities, shelters, and other specified state agencies. This bill would similarly require the Attorney General, on or before July 1, 2026, and in consultation with appropriate stakeholders, to publish model policies relating to interaction with immigration enforcement, consistent with federal and state law, and to publish guidance and recommendations for databases operated by state and local agencies to limit the availability of information in those databases for the purposes of immigration enforcement, consistent with federal and state law. The bill would require state and local agencies to implement the model policies on or before January 1, 2027, as specified. By imposing new duties on local agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. 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.
