Contra Costa Herald

News Of By and For The People of Contra Costa County, California

CA proposes forcing LGBTQ advocacy on every student ID – no exemptions for religious schools

By Leave a Comment

By California Family Council

SACRAMENTO, CA — A new bill introduced by Assemblyman Mark González, a member of the California LGBTQ Caucus, is poised to impose LGBTQ advocacy on every public and private school in the state. Assembly Bill 727 mandates that all 7-12 schools—both public and private—as well as public and private universities print the contact information of an LGBTQ advocacy organization, the Trevor Project, on every student identification card. Most concerningly, the bill offers no exemptions for religious schools that hold faith-based objections to the ideological positions promoted by this private organization.

AB 727: A Mandate That Violates Religious Freedom
The Trevor Project is one of the most well-known, influential, and well-funded LGBTQ advocacy groups in the country. According to its website, its mission is “ending suicide among lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and questioning (LGBTQ+) young people.” The organization not only provides 24-hour, seven-days-a-week crisis hotline and chat support, but also provides peer support that connects minors ages 13-17 with adults 18 to 23, education curriculum and teacher training, as well as pushing public policies and research that promote LGBTQ ideology as the answer to troubled teens.

The text of the bill reads:
(4) Commencing July 1, 2026, a public school, including a charter school, or a private school that serves pupils in any of grades 7 to 12, inclusive, and that issues pupil identification cards shall have printed on either side of the pupil identification cards The Trevor Project’s 24 hours per day, 7 days per week suicide hotline that is available through both of the following options:
(A) Telephone number: 1-866-488-7386.
(B) Text line, which can be accessed by texting START to 678-678.

While no one wants to see a child struggle with bullying, depression, and suicidal thoughts, many family-oriented faith-based groups do not want students pushed further toward a transgender identity or encouraged to embrace same-sex desires and sexual behaviors, which only results in further despair and long-term harm.

Under the guise of suicide prevention, this bill would compel Christian and religious schools to print the contact information of the Trevor Project on the back of student identification cards, even though this organization promotes beliefs contrary to their deeply held faith. This is a direct violation of First Amendment rights and an egregious overreach of government authority into the affairs of religious institutions.

The Trevor Project’s Troubling Track Record
The California Family Council (CFC) has extensively documented the dangers of the Trevor Project’s influence in schools. These concerns go beyond simple political or ideological disagreements—they touch on serious risks to children’s mental, emotional, and even physical well-being.

1. Role-Playing LGBTQ Scenarios in Schools
CFC has reported on how The Trevor Project has been used as an entryway to LGBTQ indoctrination in schools. Parents in Vista Unified School District (VUSD) were shocked to discover that students were required to participate in a role-playing exercise in which they had to “come out” as LGBTQ. This activity, known as Coming Out Stars, was taken directly from materials provided by The Trevor Project.

Students who objected due to religious beliefs were pressured to comply, and parents were not informed that such content was being introduced into their children’s education. CFC Vice President Greg Burt called out this coercion:

“The California Family Council stands with these parents in their fight for truth and transparency. Schools should be teaching kids math and reading, not coercing them into role-playing as LGBTQ+ individuals or pushing the false ideology that gender is fluid.”

2. Online Predator Risks on Trevor Space
Santa Ana Unified School board member and former teacher Brenda Lebsack investigated The Trevor Project’s online chatrooms and exposed alarming risks to minors. She found that their online platform, Trevor Space, connected vulnerable youth with unverified adults in private chatrooms under the guise of offering “support.”

Lebsack, posing as a child questioning her gender, was granted immediate access without age verification and directed to clubs promoting witchcraft, polyamory, and even age-regression kinks. This has led organizations like Gays Against Groomers to refer to Trevor Space as a “pedophile’s paradise.”
Despite these risks, The Trevor Project remains deeply embedded in California’s public education system, promoted by school counselors, the Attorney General, and even legislative bodies pushing LGBTQ policies.

3. Suicide Hotline on CA Student IDs Surveys Kids on Gender Identity
Another major concern is how suicide prevention hotlines have become tools for ideological indoctrination. In California, students as young as 7th grade already have suicide hotline numbers printed on their ID cards, and when they call for help, they are immediately asked about their gender identity.

Instead of focusing on providing genuine support for mental health struggles, hotline operators already push children toward gender identity exploration and funnel them into pro-LGBTQ organizations like The Trevor Project. This bill will bypass the supposedly objective counselors and connect students directly with Trevor Project advocates. This is not suicide prevention—it is grooming children into gender ideology.

A Direct Violation of President Trump’s Executive Order
This coercive government policy stands in direct opposition to President Trump’s recent Executive Order on Ending Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling. The order specifically aims to eliminate: “Federal funding or support for illegal and discriminatory treatment and indoctrination in K-12 schools, including based on gender ideology and discriminatory equity ideology.”

AB 727 contradicts this order by mandating schools to promote LGBTQ advocacy, even against their religious convictions. If allowed to stand, this bill could set a dangerous precedent—paving the way for further government-mandated ideological messaging in private religious institutions.

“We Must Protect These Vulnerable Kids”
Greg Burt, Vice President of California Family Council, has strongly condemned this legislation: “No child should experience bullying, but The Trevor Project takes advantage of troubled and vulnerable youth who need our compassion and help, and leads them down a path that will destroy their futures. These struggling kids are being offered lies about their true God-given identity as a boy or a girl and told to let their sexual desires determine their identity and behavior. That’s not the answer to depression and suicidal thoughts—it’s a path toward deeper confusion and despair.”

Students experiencing distress deserve real help, not further indoctrination into a harmful and misleading worldview.

About California Family Council
California Family Council works to advance God’s design for life, family, and liberty through California’s Church, Capitol, and Culture. By advocating for policies that reinforce the sanctity of life, the strength of traditional marriages, and the essential freedoms of religion, CFC is dedicated to preserving California’s moral and social foundation.

CA State Superintendent announces 2025 Model Continuation High Schools, four in Contra Costa

By Leave a Comment

Among 74 honored out of 429 in state

SACRAMENTO—State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond announced today that 74 schools throughout the state were recognized as Model Continuation High Schools (MCHS) for 2025. These schools provide comprehensive services to at-risk youth through exemplary instructional strategies, flexible scheduling, and guidance and counseling services. Continuation schools provide a high school diploma program for students who have not graduated from high school, are required to attend school, and are at risk of not completing their education.

Four of those schools are located in Contra Costa County:
• Antioch Unified School District, Bidwell High School in Antioch
• Mount Diablo Unified School District, Olympic High School in Concord
• San Ramon Valley Unified School District, Del Amigo High in San Ramon
• West Contra Costa School District, Sylvester Greenwood Academy in Richmond

“Today, we celebrate 74 commendable schools for their tremendous efforts as alternative campuses of learning,” said Superintendent Thurmond. “The priority of our Model Continuation High Schools is to give students more than a diploma. The teachers and administrators aim to provide students with a student-centered approach that meets their diverse academic, social, and emotional needs and opportunities to explore options beyond high school, preparing students for the future whether they choose to pursue further education or join the workforce.”

Currently, there are 429 continuation high schools who serve close to 49,000 students throughout the state. MCHSs excel and provide exceptional opportunities for their students to pursue academic and social success.

The Model Continuation High School Recognition Program is a collaborative partnership between the California Department of Education (CDE) and the California Continuation Education Association Plus (CCEA Plus). Schools operate their own exemplary programs, but Model Continuation High School–recognized educators commit to supporting and mentoring their peers in other local educational agencies.

The 74 schools selected as Model Continuation High Schools retain their designation for three years. They will be recognized at the CCEA Plus 2025 State Conference in April. For more information on continuation education, please visit the CDE Continuation Education web page.

Allen D. Payton contributed to this report.

Parks California awards $1 million in Route to Parks grants to 31 organizations

By Leave a Comment

Now in its fifth year, program expands efforts to make it easy for visitors to get to state parks

SACRAMENTO – Parks California and California State Parks announced this week grants to 31 organizations throughout California, totaling more than $1 million to improve access to state parks and create memorable nature experiences. Through Parks California’s Route to Parks grant program, these funds will help more than 7,700 people create lasting memories at state parks in 2025.

The 2025 grantees include programs from across the state, focused on providing experiences in parks through activities such as camping, backpacking by bike and recurring, single-day programs. Three projects with California Native American tribes: Fernandeño Tataviam Band of Mission Indians, Jamul Indian Village and the Mishewal Wappo will help increase access to their ancestral lands and cultivate collaboration and partnerships with park staff.

For the 2025 grant cycle, we sought proposals that address the following criteria:
• Primarily provide transportation to/from California State Parks and beaches;
• Offer valuable recreational, environmental, cultural or historical learning experiences;
• Reach underrepresented communities who may face challenges getting to or enjoying parks, and/or lack opportunities to create meaningful connections to nature;
• Address parts of the state with the greatest transportation needs.

“The Route to Parks program highlights the power of partnerships in complementing California State Park’s efforts, bridging gaps to ensure memorable outdoor access for all,” said California State Parks Director Armando Quintero. “Partnering with Parks California expands our efforts in creating more opportunities for Californians to make lasting connections with the wonder of their state parks.”

Parks California’s Route to Parks grants program was launched in 2020 to reduce transportation barriers and help ensure that historically marginalized communities can visit and enjoy California’s world-class state parks. The program is made possible through a joint agreement between California State Parks and Parks California, and investments from private donors, including the PG&E Corporation Foundation and BMO.

“California’s state parks belong to all of us, yet too many communities face barriers to enjoying these incredible spaces,” said Parks California President and CEO Kindley Walsh Lawlor. “Through Route to Parks, we’re working alongside our partners to break down those barriers — ensuring that transportation, cost or other obstacles don’t stand in the way of people experiencing the joy, health benefits and sense of belonging that parks provide. My sincere appreciation to this year’s grantees who are leading the way in connecting communities to nature; we are honored to support their work.”

Grant awards average $37,675 and will fund transportation, logistics and park activities. Grantee recipients represent the diversity and reach of California’s state park system.

Below are three 2025 grantee profiles:

Land Together participants enjoy fishing on their camping outing funded through the Route to Parks program. Photo from Parks California.

• Land Together (formerly Insight Garden Program)—Received $30,000 grant. “The profound appreciation I have for nature stems from being completely removed from it during my 25 years of incarceration. My journey back to nature—and ultimately to freedom—was made possible through Land Together‘s in-prison program,” said Sr. Reentry Program Manager Jamala Taylor. “I am deeply grateful for Parks California’s generous support, which has allowed us to expand this transformative work to our growing reentry community. Through our ‘Reentry Reconnect: Nature for New Beginnings’ project, we are providing healing experiences in California’s state parks for individuals reentering society after incarceration. None of this would be possible without the invaluable partnership and shared vision of Parks California.”

• San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority – Visit Allensworth by Amtrak San Joaquins – Discover Your California Heritage – Allensworth, founded in 1908, is the first town in California to be founded, financed, and governed solely by African Americans. San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority’s program will increase access and awareness of Col. Allensworth State Park for African American individuals and families in the Bay Area and Northern California and students in the Fresno and Bakersfield Unified School Districts. The program will provide free tickets and meal vouchers for the 2025 October Rededication Festival, as well as designated field trip days for Fresno Unified and Bakersfield City School District students. This program cultivates a tradition that is relevant, historical, and exciting and has the possibility of increasing the overall percentage of African Americans who go to California State Parks. and celebrate annual events such as October Rededication Festival.

• Jamul Indian Village—Received $80,000 grant. “The Jamul Indian Village of California of the Kumeyaay Nation is excited to have been awarded this grant from Parks California,” said Tribal Historic Preservation Officer and Cultural Resources Manager Lisa K. Cumper. “With this grant, we are eager to take tribal youth and their families to various state park locations along the coast of San Diego. We will be able to share and teach the rich history of our ancestors to our youth. This important cultural knowledge needs to be passed down, and this grant is allowing us to accomplish this goal. We are also grateful to continue to grow our relationship with State Parks staff members.”

A complete list of grant recipients is available online.

“The Route to Parks program embodies California’s commitment to making valuable recreational, environmental, cultural or historical learning experiences available to all Californians,” said California Natural Resources Agency Deputy Secretary for Access Gloria Sandoval. “Partners like Parks California are helping reduce barriers and form partnerships. We are especially excited to greet first-time visitors so that they can enjoy all that our beautiful state has to offer.”

State Parks’ Waterway Connections Initiative funding and private donor investments allowed Parks California to engage organizations that could connect participants to water-related outdoor experiences. Six projects feature programs designed to follow watersheds from headwater to groundwater, offering an unparalleled educational experience to understanding California’s unique watersheds.

Route to Parks has partnered with more than 85 community organizations to serve more than 16,000 people in its first four years. The program enables grantees to design activities that best meet their community’s needs and deliver experiences most suited to participants’ backgrounds, experiences and interests. The program is aligned with the Outdoor Access for All initiative championed by Governor Gavin Newsom and First Partner Jennifer Siebel Newsom and the Natural Resources Agency’s Outdoors for All initiative for greater access to all Californians with a priority to expand access in underserved communities.

The California Department of Parks and Recreation, popularly known as State Parks, and the programs supported by its Office of Historic Preservation and divisions of Boating and Waterways and Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Recreation provides for the health, inspiration and education of the people of California by helping to preserve the state’s extraordinary biological diversity, protecting its most valued natural and cultural resources, and creating opportunities for high-quality outdoor recreation. Learn more at parks.ca.gov.

About Parks California
Parks California is the official public-private nonprofit partner to California State Parks. Working statewide, it’s uniquely positioned to innovate and work hand-in-hand with communities and experts to bring resources together, ensuring that everyone can experience healthy and thriving parks for generations to come. Parks California launched in 2019 and since has partnered with more than 100 nonprofit and tribal groups to help more than 28,000 people experience one of California’s 280 state parks — many for the first time ever — in the hopes of starting a lifelong love of nature.

Allen D. Payton contributed to this report.

Richmond man wanted for felony domestic violence killed in officer involved shooting

By Leave a Comment

Brandished what appeared to be a knife but determined later to be a sheath

CA Attorney General investigating

By Lt. Donald Patchin, PIO, Richmond Police Department

On Tuesday, February 4, 2025, at 8:13 p.m., officers from the Richmond Police Department responded to the 2700 block of Maine Avenue in an attempt to locate a wanted subject. The subject was wanted on a probation violation warrant related to domestic violence charges.

Officers located the wanted subject on the Union Pacific Railroad right of way just west of the 300 block of Carlson Blvd. The subject refused to cooperate with officers, and a standoff ensued. During the standoff, the suspect wielded an object that appeared to be a knife. The subject ignored multiple commands to drop the object. Officers spent approximately 32 minutes attempting to de-escalate the situation and reach a peaceful resolution.

Despite our officers’ efforts to defuse the situation and end the standoff peacefully, the suspect charged the officers with the object in his hand while raising it in a threatening manner. At approximately 8:53 p.m., an officer-involved shooting occurred, and the wanted subject sustained fatal injuries.

Suspect’s knife sheath discovered later. Photo by Richmond PD

We later determined the object was not a knife. The black knife sheath in the photo is the object the subject wielded, which investigators recovered at the scene.

The Contra Costa Law Enforcement Involved Fatal Protocol, a set of guidelines and procedures followed in cases of officer-involved fatalities, was invoked, and the Contra Costa District Attorney’s Office responded to investigate.

We are committed to a thorough, transparent investigation.

Under the requirements of AB 1506, we recognized the California Department of Justice (DOJ) treats this as an “unarmed” officer-involved fatal incident, and we immediately notified them. The DOJ dispatched investigators to the scene to investigate.

We are fully cooperating with the DOJ’s independent investigation. We believe it is important to release information in a transparent manner. We intend to release additional information as soon as the investigation allows.

According to a press release issued on Wednesday, Feb. 5, “California Attorney General Rob Bonta announced that the California Department of Justice (DOJ), pursuant to Assembly Bill 1506 (AB 1506), is investigating and will independently review an officer-involved shooting (OIS) that occurred in Richmond, California on Tuesday, February 4, 2025.

Following notification by local authorities, DOJ’s California Police Shooting Investigation Team initiated an investigation in accordance with AB 1506 mandates. Upon completion of the investigation, it will be turned over to DOJ’s Special Prosecutions Section within the Criminal Law Division for independent review.

More information on the California Department of Justice’s role and responsibilities under AB 1506 is available here: https://oag.ca.gov/ois-incidents.”

Allen D. Payton contributed to this report.

CHP’s Organized Retail Crime Task Force achieves record-breaking success in 2024

By Leave a Comment

Source: CHP

After a record-setting 2023 combatting organized retail crime, the California Highway Patrol (CHP) continues to aggressively disrupt and dismantle illegal operations throughout California. Thanks to the state’s continued investment in combating organized retail crime, the CHP is proud to announce its most successful year yet for the Organized Retail Crime Task Force (ORCTF). In 2024, the task force set new records for investigations, arrests, and recovered stolen goods since its launch in 2019—surpassing all expectations and demonstrating its unparalleled effectiveness.

In the 12 months of 2024, ORCTF efforts have resulted in:

✔ 879 investigations
✔ 1,707 arrests
✔ 676,227 stolen goods recovered
✔ $13.5 million in recovered goods value

With increased funding since 2022, CHP has expanded its efforts statewide, adding more investigators and enhancing proactive crime prevention strategies. This past holiday season, ORCTF teams partnered with local law enforcement and more than 50 retailers to safeguard shoppers, merchants, and retail districts across California. Their heightened presence deterred crime and led to in-the-moment arrests of retail criminals.

CHP’s unwavering commitment to stopping organized retail crime underscores its dedication to public safety. Recent legislation signed by Governor Gavin Newsom has further strengthened law enforcement tools to hold offenders accountable, reinforcing the ORCTF’s mission to ensure the safety and security of California communities.

For more information about CHP’s Organized Retail Theft Program, visit our website at https://www.chp.ca.gov/notify-chp/organized-retail-theft-program

The mission of the CHP is to provide the highest level of Safety, Service and Security.

CA Office of Traffic Safety awards $208,475 grant to Contra Costa Health for Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Program

By Leave a Comment

Graphics source: CA OTS

Contra Costa Health (CCH) announced Tuesday, Jan. 28, 2025, that it has received a grant from the California Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) for continued support of its Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Program.

The program will promote safety among pedestrians and bicyclists and emphasize the drivers’ responsibility to look out for people using roads and paths. The grant program runs through September 2025.

Local data show an increase of nearly 30% in fatal crashes involving pedestrians over the past decade in Contra Costa County, and that pedestrians and bicyclists are 2.4 times more likely to be seriously injured or killed in a traffic crash compared to drivers. The OTS grant funds multiple efforts to improve safety for pedestrians and bicyclists.

“The safety of people walking and biking on our roads is a top priority for our office,” OTS Director Stephanie Dougherty said. “Everyone moves, and not always by car. It’s important that we invest in efforts to protect people walking, biking and rolling that helps establish a strong traffic safety culture where everyone on California roads can travel to and from places safely.”

Graphics source: CA OTS

Grant funds will support various activities focused on bicycle and pedestrian safety:
• Support for local jurisdictions to include public health principals in road safety plans and address the community conditions that create unsafe environments for non-motorized road users.
• Promote the CCH traffic safety campaign, “Slow Roads Save Lives.”
• Community bicycle and walk “audits” of streets with high rates of pedestrian or bicyclist fatalities and serious injury crashes.
• Bicycle training courses that teach youth skills to help them stay safe on the road.
• Community events that promote bicyclist and pedestrian visibility and the importance of sharing the road, slowing down, and staying alert to bicyclists and pedestrians while driving.

Funding for this program was provided by a grant from the California Office of Traffic Safety, through the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

 

Federal judge defends teachers right to say ‘no’ to California’s gender secrecy policy

By Leave a Comment

SACRAMENTO, CA — In a pivotal ruling for parental rights, U.S. District Court Judge Roger T. Benitez refused to dismiss a class-action lawsuit against California’s controversial policies requiring educators to keep parents uninformed when their children express gender confusion or request to change their names and pronouns at school. The decision, handed down on January 7, 2025, denies the motions filed by California Attorney General Rob Bonta and the California Department of Education to throw out the case by arguing that gender secrecy policies were “just a suggestion,” and not mandated on school districts. Now the suit can move forward toward potentially overturning the state’s ban parent notification policies with the passage of AB 1955 last year.

Teachers Not Required to Keep Secrets from Parents
In a powerful statement addressing the rights of educators, Judge Benitez clarified that teachers are under no obligation to follow policies that compel them to deceive or withhold information from parents. Judge Benitez emphasized that “teachers do not completely forfeit their First Amendment rights in exchange for public school employment.” He noted that while teachers may be required to deliver specific curricula, the government cannot force them to act unlawfully or infringe on parental rights. Benitez agreed with the plaintiffs that state policies compel them to act in ways that are “intentionally deceptive and unlawful,” violating the teachers’ First Amendment rights.

Upholding Parents’ Constitutional Rights
Judge Benitez also emphasized long-standing constitutional protections for parents in the upbringing and health decisions of their children. “Parents’ rights to make decisions concerning the care, custody, control, and medical care of their children is one of the oldest of the fundamental liberty interests that Americans enjoy,” he wrote, rebuking the state’s argument that parents have no fundamental right to be informed of their child’s gender identity at school. “However, under California state policy and EUSD policy, if a school student expresses words or actions during class that are visible signs that the child is dealing with gender incongruity or possibly gender dysphoria, teachers are ordered not to inform the parents.”

Ultimately, the judge denied the state’s efforts to dismiss the case, stating, “There are no controlling decisions that would compel this Court to limit or infringe parental rights, notwithstanding the State’s laudable goals of protecting children.”

The ruling directly challenges California’s “Parental Exclusion Policies,” which have allowed schools to hide critical gender identity information from families under the guise of student privacy. Judge Benitez concluded that parents have a constitutional right to know about their child’s gender incongruity, especially when such conditions could lead to significant mental health issues like depression or suicidal ideation.

Broad Implications for State Policy
The lawsuit is now free to move forward, and if successful, it could dismantle policies statewide that currently compel educators to bypass parents on sensitive matters concerning gender identity. This would represent a significant victory for parental rights advocates who argue that these policies infringe on the fundamental rights of families and erode trust between parents and schools.

Legal Counsel Speaks Out
Paul Jonna, Special Counsel for the Thomas More Society, Partner LiMandri & Jonna LLP, and a lead attorney on the case, hailed the decision as a milestone moment for parental rights. “We are incredibly pleased that the Court has denied all attempts to throw out our landmark challenge to California’s parental exclusion and gender secrecy regime,” Jonna said in a press release. “Judge Benitez’s order rightly highlights the sacrosanct importance of parents’ rights in our constitutional order and the First Amendment protections afforded to parents and teachers.”

Jonna emphasized the broader goal of achieving statewide relief for all parents and teachers affected by the secrecy policies, adding, “We look forward to continuing to prosecute this case against California Attorney General Rob Bonta and the other defendants, to put this issue to rest once and for all—by obtaining class-wide relief on behalf of all teachers and parents.”

Reaction from California Family Council
Greg Burt, Vice President of the California Family Council, praised the ruling for upholding parental rights. “This decision is a critical step toward restoring the sacred bond between parents and children,” Burt stated. “When government policies force schools to keep secrets from families, they cross a dangerous line. Judge Benitez’s ruling reaffirms that parental rights are not a secondary concern but a cornerstone of our constitutional freedoms.”

A Collision of Rights
Judge Benitez also addressed the tension between a child’s right to privacy and parents’ right to be informed. While acknowledging the competing interests, he concluded, “In a collision of rights as between parents and child, the long-recognized federal constitutional rights of parents must eclipse the state rights of the child.” This statement sets a clear precedent favoring parental oversight in matters of health and education.

Looking Ahead
As Mirabelli v. Olson proceeds, the case is likely to garner increased attention, setting the stage for a broader examination of how states balance student privacy with parental rights. The outcome could redefine policies across California and potentially influence similar debates nationwide.

About California Family Council
California Family Council works to advance God’s design for life, family, and liberty through California’s Church, Capitol, and Culture. By advocating for policies that reinforce the sanctity of life, the strength of traditional marriages, and the essential freedoms of religion, CFC is dedicated to preserving California’s moral and social foundation.

CHP highlights new laws for 2025

By Leave a Comment

Includes reckless driving & sideshow enforcement, electric bicycle safety, autonomous vehicles, retail theft, more

SACRAMENTO – As we head into the new year, the California Highway Patrol (CHP) is highlighting the new public safety laws that were passed during this year’s legislative session and signed by Governor Gavin Newsom. Unless otherwise noted, the laws referenced below take effect on January 1, 2025.

Tools to Address Reckless Driving and Sideshows:

Vehicles: Speed Contests (AB 1978, Sanchez)

Assembly Bill 1978 permits storing a vehicle when an individual is arrested but not taken into custody for obstructing or placing a barricade a highway or off-street parking facility for purposes of aiding a speed contest or exhibition of speed.

Vehicles: Impoundment (AB 2186, Wallis)

Assembly Bill 2186 permits the arrest and custody of individuals engaged in an exhibition of speed in an off-street parking facility. It also permits the impounding of the individual’s vehicle for not more than 30 days.

Vehicles: Sideshows and Street Takeovers (AB 2807, Villapudua)

Assembly Bill 2807 defines a “sideshow” and a “street takeover” as the same type of event.

Vehicles: Removal and Impoundment (AB 3085, Gipson)

Assembly Bill 3085 provides authority to seize and impound a vehicle with a warrant when the vehicle was used in violation of a speed contest or exhibition of speed (including aiding or abetting). This bill also permits electronic service of the notices of impoundment and storage hearings.

Emergency Alert Information Sharing:

Electronic Toll Collection Systems: Information Sharing: Law Enforcement (AB 2645, Lackey)

Assembly Bill 2645 allows transportation agencies operating electronic toll collection systems to share real-time license plate data with law enforcement during active emergency alerts, such as AMBER, Ebony, or Feather Alerts. This legislation eliminates the need for a search warrant in such situations, enabling quicker responses to locate suspect vehicles linked to emergencies, such as child abductions.

Electric Bicycle Safety:

Electric Bicycles, Powered Mobility Devices and Storage (SB 1271, Min)

Beginning January 1, 2026, SB 1271 focuses on improving the safety standards for electric bicycles (e-bikes), powered mobility devices, and related lithium-ion batteries. It requires these devices and their components, such as batteries and charging systems, to be tested by accredited laboratories to meet specific safety standards. The bill also mandates labeling these products to show compliance with safety regulations, ensuring consumers are informed. Furthermore, it prohibits distributing, selling, or leasing e-bikes and related equipment unless they meet these standards, aiming to reduce risks like fire hazards and electrical malfunctions. Beginning January 1, 2028, the bill would prohibit a person from renting or offering for rental an electric bicycle, powered mobility device, charging system, or storage battery unless it has been tested to the specified safety standard.

Vehicles: Electric Bicycles (AB 1774, Gipson)

Assembly Bill 1774 prohibits modifying an electric bicycle’s speed capability to an extent it no longer meets the definition of an electric bicycle.  Also, it prohibits selling a product or device that can modify the speed capability of an electric bicycle to an extent it no longer meets the definition of an electric bicycle.

Vehicles: Electric Bicycles (AB 1778, Connolly)

Assembly Bill 1778 authorizes a local authority within the County of Marin, or the County of Marin in unincorporated areas, to enact an ordinance or resolution prohibiting a person under 16 years of age from operating a class 2 electric bicycle or requiring a person operating a class 2 electric bicycle to wear a helmet.

Vehicles: Electric Bicycles (AB 2234, Boerner)

Assembly Bill 2234 establishes the San Diego Electric Bicycle Safety Program and authorizes a local authority within the County of San Diego, or the County of San Diego in unincorporated areas, to enact an ordinance or resolution prohibiting a person under 12 years of age from operating a class 1 or 2 electric bicycle.

Photo Enforced Speed Enforcement Pilot Program:

The City of Malibu’s Speed Safety System Pilot Program (SB 1297, Allen)

Senate Bill 1297 establishes a five-year Speed Safety System Pilot Program in the City of Malibu. The bill defines a ‘speed safety system’ as a fixed or mobile radar or laser system, or any other electronic device that utilizes automated equipment, to detect a violation of speed laws and obtains a clear photograph of a speeding vehicle’s license plate. The bill establishes mandates regarding policy, enforcement, implementation, public notification, and a system evaluation report.

Clean Air Vehicle Sticker Extension:

Vehicles: High-Occupancy Vehicle Lanes (AB 2678, Wallis)

Assembly Bill 2678 permits vehicles with a Clean Air Vehicle decal to drive in High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes until January 1, 2027, if federal law permits.

Autonomous Vehicles:

Vehicle Equipment: Driver Monitoring Defeat Devices (SB 1313, Ashby)

Senate Bill 1313 prohibits using, possessing, or selling devices designed to interfere with driver monitoring systems in vehicles equipped with advanced driver assistance systems or autonomous technology. These systems monitor driver alertness and help ensure safety when automated features are used. Violating this law is classified as an infraction. Exceptions are provided for manufacturers testing new technology, vehicle repairs, and updates compliant with safety standards or modifications for disability accommodations. This law aims to enhance road safety by preventing tampering with critical monitoring systems.

Autonomous Vehicles Interactions with First Responders and Traffic Violation Notices – AB 1777 (Ting)

Upon the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) adoption of necessary regulations, AB 1777 creates new authority for a law enforcement officer to issue a “notice of autonomous vehicle (AV) noncompliance” to an AV manufacturer for an alleged traffic violation committed by one of their vehicles.  Beginning July 1, 2026, AB 1777 establishes additional requirements for how AVs that operate without a human operator in the vehicle interact with first responders, including a requirement for manufacturers to provide a two-way device in the vehicles to communicate with first responders.

Pedestrian Safety Around Buses:

Transit buses: Yield Right-of-Way Sign (AB 1904, Ward)

Assembly Bill 1904 authorizes a transit agency to equip a transit bus with a “yield” right-of-way sign on the left rear of the bus.  The sign may be a static decal or a flashing light-emitting diode (LED).

License Plate Manipulation:

License Plates: Obstruction or Alteration (AB 2111, Wallis)

Assembly Bill 2111 prohibits any alteration of a license plate’s reflective coating to avoid detection from any entity, not just law enforcement.

Property Theft from a Vehicle:

Crimes: Theft from A Vehicle (SB 905, Wiener)

Senate Bill 905 creates the crime of Unlawful Entry of a Vehicle, which addresses unlawfully entering a vehicle with the intent to commit a theft or any felony. It also adds the crime of Automotive Property Theft for Resale, which addresses possessing stolen property obtained from a vehicle with the intent to sell or exchange the property for value. The property’s value must be over $950.00 and not for personal use. The value of property can be combined within two years of separate acts.

Combating Retail Theft:

Crimes: Organized Theft (SB 982, Wahab)

Senate Bill 982 makes the crime of organized retail theft permanent and strengthens measures to address retail crime. The bill eliminates the expiration date for specific provisions targeting organized retail theft, ensuring long-term tools for law enforcement to combat this issue.

Crimes: Fires (SB 1242, Min)

Senate Bill 1242 amends Penal Code Section 452 regarding the unlawful setting of fires. It updates penalties and legal language to clarify offenses, including circumstances involving organized retail theft.

Sentencing Enhancements: Sale, Exchange, Or Return of Stolen Property (SB 1416 Newman)

Senate Bill 1416 focuses on combating organized retail theft by increasing penalties for those involved in the resale of stolen goods, often referred to as “fencing.” The bill, until January 1, 2030, creates sentencing enhancements for individuals who sell, exchange, or return stolen property for value, particularly when the property exceeds specific thresholds. Punishment increases from one year to four years based on a property value scale ranging from $50,000 to over $3 million.

Theft: Jurisdiction (AB 1779, Irwin)

Assembly Bill 1779 addresses the issue of organized retail theft by streamlining the prosecution process. Specifically, it allows district attorneys to consolidate charges for theft offenses committed across multiple counties into a single trial, provided all affected county district attorneys agree.

Crimes: Organized Theft (AB 1802, Jones-Sawyer)

Assembly Bill 1802 ensures that the crime of organized retail theft remains permanently defined in state law and extends the CHP’s Property Crimes Task Force indefinitely. This bill eliminates the “sunset” clause that would have otherwise allowed the statute and the task force to expire.

Regional Property Crimes Task Force (AB 1972, Alanis)

Assembly Bill 1972 expands the scope of the CHP’s Regional Property Crimes Task Force to include cargo theft as a property crime for consideration and requires the task force to provide logistical and law enforcement support for railroad police.

This bill emphasizes cargo theft as a specific priority and aims to strengthen resources for law enforcement agencies to combat these issues. As an urgency statute, AB 1972 went into effect immediately upon its passage in August 2024 to address these concerns promptly.

Crimes: Shoplifting (AB 2943, Zbur)

Assembly Bill 2943, also called the “California Retail Theft Reduction Act,” strengthens measures to combat organized retail theft by creating a specific crime for serial retail theft, allowing the aggregation of property value for thefts committed within 90 days to qualify as grand theft. It empowers law enforcement to make arrests using video evidence or sworn statements, shields businesses from lawsuits for reporting crimes and promotes rehabilitation through diversion programs for minor offenders. The bill aims to dismantle theft rings while balancing public safety and criminal justice reforms.

Crimes: Theft: Retail Theft Restraining Orders (AB 3209, Berman)

Assembly Bill 3209 creates a retail crime restraining order.  A court may issue a restraining order when sentencing an individual for specific retail theft-related crimes, including vandalism of a retail store and assaulting a retail store employee.  The restraining order prohibits the individual from entering or being on the grounds of the establishment and may include parking lots adjacent to and used by the establishment.

The mission of the CHP is to provide the highest level of Safety, Service, and Security.

As Prop 36 goes into effect CA Attorney General Bonta issues info bulletin to law enforcement

By Leave a Comment

Increases penalties for shoplifting and certain drug crimes

On Dec. 13, California Attorney General Rob Bonta issued an Information Bulletin to all law enforcement agencies in the state about Proposition 36 which passed overwhelmingly in November and went into effect on Wednesday, Dec. 18th. The bulletin highlights the statutory changes and additions made to current law under the proposition known as “The Homelessness, Drug Addiction, and Theft Reduction Act.”

“Ultimately, our success in combating organized retail crime hinges on our ability to work together, innovate, and remain steadfast in our commitment to protecting our neighborhoods and businesses,” said Attorney General Bonta. “Let us harness the strength of our partnerships, the power of new legislation, and the collective resolve of our community to create a safer and more secure environment for everyone. My office is committed to fighting organized retail crime head on.”

Proposition 36 modifies existing law and adds substantive charges and enhancements to areas of the Penal Code and Health and Safety Code regarding theft, property damage, and drug-related crimes. The changes include the creation of new felony theft and drug crimes targeting recidivist offenders, removal of eligibility for the sentences of certain offenses to be served in county jail pursuant to Penal Code section 1170(h) as opposed to state prison, and alignment of the punishment for crimes involving fentanyl with that of other similar controlled substances.

Following is Bonta’s Information Bulletin:

TO: ALL CALIFORNIA LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES PROPOSITION 36: “The Homelessness, Drug Addiction, and Theft Reduction Act”

On November 5, 2024, California voters passed Proposition 36, known as “The Homelessness, Drug Addiction, and Theft Reduction Act.” Proposition 36 takes effect on December 18, 2024.

Proposition 36 modifies existing law and adds substantive charges and enhancements to areas of the Penal Code and Health and Safety Code regarding theft, property damage, and drug-related crimes. The changes include: (1) the creation of new felony theft and drug crimes targeting recidivist offenders; (2) removal of eligibility for the sentences of certain offenses to be served in county jail pursuant to Penal Code section 1170(h); and (3) alignment of the punishment for crimes involving fentanyl with that of other similar controlled substances.

The purpose of this bulletin is to highlight the statutory changes and additions made by Proposition 36.

CHANGES UNDER PROPOSITION 36 RELATING TO THEFT AND PROPERTY DAMAGE

Penal Code section 490.3 (Aggregation of Losses in Multiple Thefts): Proposition 36 creates a new Penal Code section 490.3 which permits aggregation of the value of property or merchandise stolen during multiple thefts to meet the $950 threshold for a felony without having to prove that the various crimes were motivated by one intention, one general impulse, and one plan. This new section applies to theft or shoplifting, including, but not limited to, violations of Penal Code sections 459.5, 484, 488, and 490.2.

Penal Code section 490.3 applies “notwithstanding any other law,” and is therefore broader than other laws such as Penal Code section 487, subdivision (e) and the new Penal Code section 12022.10,1

1 which would permit aggregation only in limited circumstances, such as if the acts were motivated by one intention, one general impulse, and one plan, or only if there was a common scheme or plan, respectively.

Penal Code section 666.1 (Felony Crime of Theft with Two Prior Thefts): Penal Code section 666.1 is a new, recidivist felony offense of committing petty theft or shoplifting while having two or more prior misdemeanor or felony convictions for specified theft-related crimes. A first conviction under Penal Code section 666.1, subdivision (a)(1) is punishable in county jail pursuant to Penal Code section 1170(h), second or subsequent convictions are punishable in county jail or state prison. Other notable aspects of Penal Code section 666.1 include:

  • There is no “washout” timeframe on the prior convictions that qualify a defendant to be charged with a violation of Penal Code section 666.1(a)(1)—all prior convictions qualify, regardless of when they occurred.
  • Although Penal Code section 666.1 does not mandate that the two or more specified prior convictions be alleged in the accusatory pleading, existing authority suggests that the prior convictions must be alleged and proved at preliminary hearing so a defendant can be held to answer on a Penal Code section 666.1 charge. (See People v. Casillas (2001) 92 Cal.App.4th 171.)
  • Section 666.1 applies “notwithstanding any other law,” meaning that it will apply even if a defendant could alternatively have been prosecuted for a misdemeanor theft-related charge pursuant to another statute.
  • Upon arrest on a Penal Code section 666.1 charge, subdivision (c) requires judicial review prior to release from custody to make an individualized determination of the arrestee’s risk to public safety and likelihood to return to court.

Penal Code section 12022.6 (Excessive Takings Enhancement): Proposition 36 re-enacts and modifies several aspects of the Penal Code section 12022.6 enhancement, which was repealed at the end of 2017 because of a sunset date. Penal Code section 12022.6 applies when an offender takes, damages, or destroys property in the commission or attempted commission of a felony, or commits a felony in violation of Penal Code section 496 (possessing/receiving/selling stolen property). This enhancement must be pled and proved. The enhancements are as follows:

  • One-year enhancement – loss or property value over $50,000
  • Two-year enhancement – loss or property value over $200,000
  • Three-year enhancement – loss or property value over $1 million
  • Four-year enhancement – loss or property value over $3 million
  • One-year enhancement for every additional loss or property value of $3 million (imposed in addition to the four-year, $3 million enhancement)

The enhancements may be imposed if the combined losses to the victims or the combined property values from all felonies exceed the threshold amounts and arise from a common scheme or plan. The enhancement permits the court to impose a Penal Code section 12022.6 enhancement and another enhancement on a single count, including an enhancement pursuant to new Penal Code section 12022.65 (acting in concert to take, damage, or destroy property—see below). Thus, a defendant may be punished for both acting in concert (Pen. Code § 12022.65) and for taking or damaging property valued at more than $50,000 (Pen. Code § 12022.6). The punishment specified in Penal Code sections 12022.6, subdivisions (a)(1) and (a)(2) will continue to apply where Penal Code section 186.11 has been charged, as it previously did.2

Penal Code section 12022.65 (Theft or Property Damage In-Concert Enhancement): Penal Code section 12022.65 is a new enhancement that applies when an offender acts in concert with two or more persons to take, attempt to take, damage, or destroy property, in the commission or attempted commission of a felony. This enhancement has a range of one, two, or three years and must be pled and proved.

CHANGES UNDER PROPOSITION 36 RELATING TO CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES

Health and Safety Code section 11369 (Warning to Dealers of Hard Drugs): Proposition 36 creates a new section 11369 in the Health and Safety Code section 11369 which requires the trial court to advise anyone convicted of a violation of Health and Safety Section 11351, 11351.5, 11352, 11378, 11378.5, 11379, 11379.5, or 11379.6 involving a hard drug,3 that distributing, selling, furnishing, administering, giving away, or manufacturing any drug is extremely dangerous and deadly to human life, and if the conduct continues, the defendant can be charged with homicide, up to and including murder.4 The admonishment must be given to the defendant in writing and the court record must reflect that the admonishment was given.

Health and Safety Code section 11370.1 (Possessing a Drug While Armed with a Firearm): Health and Safety Code section 11370.1 is modified by Proposition 36 to expand the felony crime of unlawfully possessing a specified substance while armed with a loaded, operable firearm to include any substance containing fentanyl. Health and Safety Code section 11370.1 continues to apply to substances containing cocaine, cocaine base, heroin, methamphetamine, or phencyclidine, and continues to provide punishment of two, three, or four years in state prison.

Health and Safety Code section 11370.4 (Controlled Substance Weight Enhancement): Health and Safety Code section 11370.4 is modified by Proposition 36 by adding a new subdivision (c), which provides a range of enhancements for a violation of Health and Safety Code sections 11351, 11352, or a conspiracy to violate either section, involving fentanyl.5 The following chart breaks down the nine new weight enhancements for fentanyl in specific quantities:

Source: Office of the CA Attorney General

New subdivision (e) provides that notwithstanding Penal Code section 1170, subdivision (h)(9), a defendant convicted of an underlying violation specified in Health and Safety Code section 11370.4 (e.g., Health & Saf. Code §§ 11351, 11351.5, 11352, 11378, 11378.5, 11379, and 11379.5) who admits a weight enhancement or for whom a weight enhancement is found true for any of the listed controlled substances, is punishable in state prison and not county jail pursuant to Penal Code section 1170, subdivision (h).

Health and Safety Code section 11395 (“Treatment-Mandated Felony Act”): Proposition 36 creates Health and Safety Code section 11395, a new, recidivist felony offense of possessing a “hard drug” and having two or more prior felony or misdemeanor convictions for specified drug-related crimes. A violation of Health and Safety Code section 11395 is punishable in county jail pursuant to Penal Code section 1170(h) for a first conviction. Subsequent convictions are punishable in state prison. Both first and subsequent convictions are wobblers and eligible for probation unless otherwise prohibited. Other notable aspects of Health and Safety Code section 11395 include:

  • Section 11395 applies “notwithstanding any other law,” meaning that it will apply even if a defendant would have been eligible for a misdemeanor drug possession charge (e.g., Health & Saf. Code § 11350 or 11377), Penal Code section 1000 drug diversion, or probation for a non-violent drug possession offense pursuant to Penal Code section 1210.1.
  • The two or more prior convictions of specified crimes within Health and Safety Code section 11395, subdivision (c) may be either misdemeanor or a felony convictions.
  • There is no “washout” timeframe on the prior convictions that qualify a defendant to be charged with a violation of Health and Safety Code section 11395—all prior convictions qualify, regardless of when they occurred.
  • Prior convictions must be pled and proven. (Health & Saf. Code, § 11395, subd. (c).)
  • Upon booking for a violation of Health and Safety Code section 11395, subdivision (f) requires judicial review prior to release from custody to make an individual determination of the arrestee’s risk to public safety and likelihood to return to court.

Health and Safety Code section 11395 also provides an option for treatment in lieu of incarceration for its offenses. Health and Safety Code section 11395, subdivision (d) provides that a defendant may choose treatment instead of county jail, state prison, or a grant of probation with county jail as a condition of probation.6 Upon successful completion of the treatment program, the positive recommendation of the  treatment program, and a motion by the defendant, the court shall dismiss the Health and Safety Code section 11395 charge. (Heath & Saf. Code, § 11395, subd. (d)(3).)

Penal Code section 12022, subdivision (c) (Drug Crimes While Personally Armed with a Firearm): Proposition 36 amends Penal Code section 12022, subdivision (c) to provide that the enhancement for individuals convicted of specified drug offenses and who are personally armed with a firearm, must serve the additional term in state prison instead of county jail. Subdivision (c) is further amended to provide that, notwithstanding Penal Code section 1170, subdivision (h)(9), a defendant convicted of a specified underlying violation who admits a Penal Code section 12022, subdivision (c) firearm enhancement or has such an enhancement found true, is punishable in state prison even if the underlying offense is a section 1170, subdivision (h) county jail offense.

Penal Code section 12022.7 (Great Bodily Injury (GBI) Enhancement For Drug-Related Injury): Proposition 36 amends Penal Code section 12022.7 to add subdivision (f)(2), which explicitly provides that “a person who sells, furnishes, administers, or gives away a controlled substance is deemed to have personally inflicted great bodily injury when the person to whom the substance was sold, furnished, administered, or given suffers a significant or substantial physical injury from using the substance.” This creates a great bodily injury enhancement that can be charged when the person to whom an offender supplies a drug suffers a serious injury from using the drug, including death.7

1 Penal Code section 12022.10 is a new enhancement created by Senate Bill 1416, effective January 1, 2025, for selling, exchanging, or returning for value, property acquired through one or more acts of shoplifting, theft, or burglary from a retail business. It also applies to attempted selling, exchanging, or returning, and has a sunset date of January 1, 2030. By contrast, Penal Code section 490.3 does not address the aggregation of sales of stolen property.

2 Assembly Bill 1960, effective on January 1, 2025, adds a Penal Code section 12022.6 excessive taking enhancement that is almost identical to that in Proposition 36. The non-substantive difference is that AB 1960 contains a sunset date of January 1, 2030, and Proposition 36 does not contain a sunset date.

3 “Hard drug” means a controlled substance listed in Health and Safety Code section 11054 or 11055, except that it does not include substances listed in Health and Safety Code section 11054, subdivisions (d) and (e), or, with the exception of methamphetamine, any other substance listed in Health and Safety Code section 11055, subdivision (d). (Health & Saf. Code, § 11369, subd. (d).)

4 Vehicle Code section 23593 similarly provides that, upon conviction of certain Vehicle Code provisions, courts are required to give an advisement about the dangers of drinking and driving, and warn that if someone is killed, the offender can be charged with murder.

5 Health and Safety Code section 11370.4, subdivision (a)(1) removes fentanyl from the list of controlled substances. The modification to Health and Safety Code section 11370.4 puts fentanyl in its own subdivision (c)(1) and lowers the quantity thresholds because fentanyl is more lethal than other substances in small doses. Health and Safety Code section 11370.4, subdivision (a)(1) still applies to heroin, cocaine, and cocaine base and does not change the quantities or punishment for those substances.

6 Section 11395 is a deferred entry of judgment program, in which the defendant must plead guilty or no contest before going into treatment; it is not a diversion program.

7 This new language abrogates the California Supreme Court’s decision in People v. Ollo (2021) 11 Cal.5th 682, which held that furnishing a drug that causes death does not necessarily qualify as personal infliction of great bodily injury.

Allen D. Payton contributed to this report.

CA Attorney General Bonta reminds illegal immigrants of their legal rights, protections

By Leave a Comment

Source: Office of CA Attorney General Rob Bonta

Hosts first of a series of regional convenings with immigrant rights groups, elected officials, and others ahead of Inauguration Day 

LOS ANGELES – California Attorney General Rob Bonta on Tuesday, Dec. 17, 2024, issued two guidances to help California immigrants better understand their rights and protections under the law and avoid immigration scams by those seeking to take advantage of fear and uncertainty resulting from the President-elect’s inhumane threats of mass detention, arrests, and deportation. The guidances build on the Attorney General’s announcement earlier this month of updated model policies and recommendations to help public institutions like schools, hospitals, and courts comply with California law limiting state and local participation in immigration enforcement activities. Over the coming weeks, Attorney General Bonta will continue to help Californians prepare for changes to federal immigration policy in convenings with immigrant rights groups, elected officials, and others in Los Angeles, Sacramento, Salinas, San Francisco, and San Diego, where the Attorney General and California Department of Justice (CADOJ) staff will share resources, hear concerns, and discuss ongoing efforts to protect California’s immigrant communities.

“In California, we know that our immigrants are the backbone of our communities, a driving force behind our economy, and an essential part of our history as a state,” said Bonta. “With the President-elect making clear his intent to move forward an inhumane and destructive immigration agenda once he takes office, CADOJ is releasing new and updated guidance to help immigrants understand their rights under the law. In California, we will ensure that the rights of our immigrant communities are respected and protected. I will be convening a series of discussions in the weeks ahead – the first here today in Los Angeles – focused on this essential mission.”

Know Your Immigration Rights and Protections Under the Law

  • You have the right to apply for and secure housing without sharing your immigration status. California law prohibits housing providers from asking about your immigration status unless you are applying for affordable housing funded by the federal government. Additionally, housing providers cannot harass or intimidate you by threatening or sharing information about your immigration status to ICE, law enforcement, or other government agencies.
  • You have the right to access emergency medical care. Federal laws and regulations ensure the rights of all people to access emergency medical care, including undocumented immigrants.
  • You have the right to an attorney. If you are arrested by police, you have the right to a government-appointed attorney. If you are detained by ICE and/or are facing immigration proceedings, you have the right to seek legal assistance through an attorney.
  • State and local law enforcement cannot ask for your immigration status. California law expressly prohibits law enforcement from inquiring about a person’s immigration status for immigration enforcement purposes.
  • State and local law enforcement cannot share your personal information. This includes sharing your home or work address for immigration purposes, unless that information is available to the public or unless that information involves previous criminal arrest, convictions or similar criminal history.
  • State and local law enforcement cannot assist ICE with immigration enforcement, with very limited exceptions. This means they cannot investigate, cannot interrogate, cannot arrest, and cannot detain you unless it is as part of joint federal task force where the primary purpose is not immigration enforcement.

The full “Know Your Immigration Rights” consumer alert is available in English, Spanish, Chinese, Korean, Tagalog, and Vietnamese at oag.ca.gov/immigrant/resources.

Protect Yourself from Immigration Scams

If you need help applying for immigration relief, be careful who you hire. Watch out for immigration scams that can cost you thousands of dollars and/or harm your immigration status! Here are some tips and resources to help:

  • Go to a legitimate legal aid organization for free legal help. Many nonprofit organizations provide free immigration help to low-income individuals, such as those found through the resources below. To find a legal aid organization near you, go to lawhelpca.org.
  • Keep your original documents in a safe place. Don’t give your original documents to anyone unless you see proof that the government requires the original document. If you give someone an original, they may lose it or refuse to return it unless you pay them.
  • Do not hire an immigration consultant or a notary. Only lawyers, accredited representatives, and recognized organizations can give you legal advice or represent you in immigration court. Immigration consultants – who may call themselves immigration experts, notarios, notaries public, or paralegals – cannot do so.
  • Do not give money or personal information to anyone who calls, texts, or emails you claiming that there is a problem with your immigration matter. No federal or state agency, including USCIS, will ever ask for your personal information or payment over the phone, by email, or text.

For more dos and don’ts, see the full “Immigration Services Fraud” consumer alert available in English, Spanish, Chinese (Simplified), Korean, Tagalog, and Vietnamese at oag.ca.gov/immigrant/resources.

Access Free and Low-Cost Legal Assistance 

Visit Law Help CA or Immigration Law Help to find immigration assistance near you.

File a Complaint 

If you believe your rights have been violated, report it to the California Department of Justice at oag.ca.gov/report.

If you believe you were subject to discrimination, harassment or retaliation, report it to the California Civil Rights Department at calcivilrights.ca.gov/complaintprocess/.