California Legislation Center//

2023 California Bills

Who are my California state legislators? Click here to find your assemblymember and state senator

Top Bills We're Tracking and Exposing

Here are the worst bills affecting children and families that SaveCalifornia.com is tracking for you, most of which passed their house of origin by the June 2 deadline:

AB 659 by Democrat Assemblymember Cecilia Aguiar-Curry would pretend to require unneeded, ineffective, injurious Gardasil shots for all children in government-run or private (including church) schools before they enter 8th grade, and for college students 26 and younger at government-run UC, CSU, and community colleges.

Gardasil has injured and killed many. Yet Big Pharma Democrats are maniacally still pushing it. As amended April 12 and May 22, AB 659 falsely threatens pre-teens, teens, and college students by purporting “it is the public policy of the state” that you “are expected” to be jabbed with Gardasil — when these shots are legally NOT required.

HERE ARE THE DETAILS OF THE MAY 22 AMENDED VERSION OF AB 659:

SEC. 2. Section 48980.4 is added to the Education Code, to read:
48980.4. (a) The notification required pursuant to Section 48980 for pupils admitted to or advancing to the sixth grade shall include a notification to the pupil’s parent or guardian containing a statement about the state’s public policy described in subdivision (a) of Section 120336 of the Health and Safety Code, advising that the pupil be fully immunized against human papillomavirus (HPV) before admission or advancement to the eighth grade level.
(b) The notification sent pursuant to subdivision (a) shall conform to the notification requirements outlined in this article.

SEC. 4. Section 120336 is added to the Health and Safety Code, to read:
120336. (a) It is the public policy of the state that pupils are expected to be fully immunized against human papillomavirus (HPV) before admission or advancement to the 8th eighth grade level of any private or public elementary or secondary school.
(b) Upon a pupil’s admission or advancement to the sixth grade level, the governing authority of any private or public elementary or secondary school shall submit to the pupil and their parent or guardian a notification containing a statement about the state’s public policy described in subdivision (a) and advising that the pupil be fully immunized against HPV before admission or advancement to the eighth grade level in compliance with the notification requirements of Article 4 (commencing with Section 48980) of Chapter 6 of Part 27 of Division 4 of Title 2 of the Education Code.
(c) This section does not apply to a pupil in a home-based private school.

SEC. 5. Section 120390 of the Health and Safety Code is amended to read:
120390. The department, in consultation with the Trustees of the California State University, the Regents of the University of California, and the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, as applicable, shall adopt and enforce all regulations necessary to carry out this chapter.

SEC. 6. Section 120390.6 is added to the Health and Safety Code, to read:
120390.6. It is the public policy of the state that students who are 26 years of age or younger are expected to be fully immunized against human papillomavirus (HPV) before first-time enrollment at an institution of the California State University, the University of California, or the California Community Colleges.

Bottom line, as amended April 12 and May 22, AB 659 blatantly and deceptively purports to be a "mandate," by declaring parents and college students alike to be told "it is the public policy of the state" that pre-teens, teens, and college students "are expected" to receive at least two Gardasil jabs. This bad bill pushes a dishonest product by threatening and coercing millions of California families with children and college students!

Status | Votes: AB 659 passed the Democrat-controlled State Assembly on May 31. When the bill passed the 80-member Assembly, it had 52 yes votes (11 more than the 41 majority-vote threshold). Voting yes were 51 Democrats and 1 Republican (Greg Wallis of the Palm Springs area); voting no were 12 Republicans (later Phillip Chen and James Gallagher added their "no" votes); Republicans who abstained were Laurie Davies, Diane Dixon, and Tom Lackey; abstaining Democrats were Jasmeet Bains, Blanca Pacheco, Sharon Quirk-Silva, and Akilah Weber. See our May 31 report and new action step. Earlier, this bad bill passed the Assembly Appropriations Committee on May 17 (11 Democrats voted yes, 4 Republicans voted no, and Democrat Akilah Weber abstained. Earlier, this bad bill passed the Assembly Health Committee on April 18 on a party-line vote (all the Democrats voted yes, except Democrat Akilah Weber abstained; all Republicans voted no). 

More bad bills by Assembly Democrats

AB 5 by Democrat Assemblymember and "LGBTQIA+" activist Rick Zbur would require all teachers and employees of California government schools in grades 7 through 12 to be brainwashed with "LGBTQ cultural competency training."

As amended May 2, this anti-family bill has been changed as following:

1. Instead of being a continous annual requirement, the pro-"LGBTQIA+" teacher training would "sunset" in 2030. This is the proverbial camel's nose under the tent, with the author coming back in a couple years with a new bill to make it permanent, now that everyone's "gotten used to it."

2. Instead of 4 hours of in-service training every 3 years, the amended AB 5 mandates "one hour of required training annually."

3. Instead of requiring a each school district to achieve a 95% completion rate of this pro-"LGBTQIA+" teacher training, the amended AB 5 now requires tracking the number of employees who are thusly indoctrinated, and posting that number on the school district's website and reporting it to the California Department of Education.

Before the Democrat author amended his own bill, the Democrat-controlled Legislative Counsel's Office analyzed AB 5, as amended April 17: "This bill would require the State Department of Education, on or before July 1, 2025, to finalize the development of an online training delivery platform and an online training curriculum to support LGBTQ cultural competency training for teachers and other certificated employees, as specified. The bill...would require, commencing with the 2025–26 school year, each local educational agency, as defined, serving pupils in grades 7 to 12, inclusive, to use the online training delivery platform and curriculum, or an in-service alternative, to provide at least 4 hours of training at least once every 3 years to teachers and other certificated employees at those schools, as provided. The bill would require each local educational agency to ensure a 95% completion rate of the training required pursuant to these provisions within each 3-year training period, and would require the department to report specified completion data to the Legislature, as provided. By imposing additional duties on local educational agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require these provisions to be known as the Safe and Supportive Schools Act."

Status | Votes: AB 5 on May 22 passed the State Assembly with 64 yes votes (nearly all Democrats) and 4 no votes. Republicans voting yes were Alanis, Hoover, Waldron, and Wallis; Republicans voting no were Megan Dahle, Gallagher, Jim Patterson, and Joe Patterson; Republicans not voting were Chen, Davies, Dixon, Essayli, Flora, Vince Fong, Lackey, Mathis, Sanchez, Ta; Democrats not voting were Quirk-Silva and Villapudua. Previously, this bad bill was sent to the Assembly Appropriations Committee's "suspense file." Earlier, on April 26, this bad bill passed the Assembly Education Committee, where all the Democrats and Republican Josh Hoover voted yes for this bad bill, while Republican Megan Dahle abstained.

AB 223 by "LGBTQIA+" Democrat activists (3 Democrat assemblymembers + 4 Democrat state senators) would require secrecy (sealed records) for children (minors) seeking a legal change of "gender identity."

Status | Votes: This bad bill supporting child mutilation and eliminating a parent's right to know is scheduled for June 13 hearing in the State Senate Judiciary Committee after passing the Assembly floor on March 23. Joining the supermajority Assembly Democrats in voting yes on AB 223 were 3 Republicans: Diane Dixon, Bill Essayli, and Greg Wallis. The rest of the Republicans abstained, as did Democrats Sabrina Cervantes and Brian Maienschein. Previously, on March 14, the bill passed the Democrat-controlled Assembly Judiciary Committee. Joining all the committee's Democrats in voting yes were Republicans Dixon and Essayli, while Republican Kate Sanchez voted no.

AB 315 by Democrat Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan would allow civil lawsuits based on "emotional distress" against pro-life crisis pregnancy centers (CPCs) for "false or misleading statements." This anti-child, anti-First-Amendment bill is an attempted "end run" around the 2018 U.S. Supreme Court ruling striking down a previous Democrat bill requiring pro-abortion signage at California CPCs.

Status | Votes: This bad bill is likely DEAD FOR THE YEAR because it did not escape the Assembly Appropriations by the May 19 deadline to pass fiscal bills to the floor (last action on May 18: "held under submission"). Previously, on May 3, AB 315 was put on the "suspense file" of the Assembly Appropriations Committee. Earlier, on March 21, this bad bill passed the Democrat-controlled Assembly Judiciary Committee (all 8 Democrats voted yes; all 3 Republicans voted no). 

AB 352 by Democrat Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan would hide from dads and moms their pre-teens' and teens' records on those children receiving mind-altering drugs, drug addiction treatment, fornicating advice, sexually transmitted disease treatments, "intimate partner violence," abortions, and sex-change procedures/operations. The bill would hide this "health information" by requiring:
a) any entity that electronically stores or maintain medical information to take specific steps to hide these "sensitive services"
b) the health care profession to refuse to cooperating with any inquiry or investigation in these "sensitive services" from within California or other states
c) a state advisory group to exclude these "sensitive services" in their statewide health information sharing policy.

Status | Votes: AB 352 passed the Democrat-controlled State Assembly on May 31. Voting yes were all the Democrats + 2 Republicans (Greg Wallis of the Palm Springs area and Juan Alanis of Modesto/Turlock/Patterson area); voting no were 12 Republicans: Megan Dahle, Diane Dixon, Bill Essayli, Vince Fong, James Gallagher, Tom Lackey, Devon Mathis, Jim Patterson, Joe Patterson, Kate Sanchez, Tri Ta, and Marie Waldron; abstaining were 4 Republicans: Phillip Chen, Laurie Davies, Heath Flora, and Josh Hoover. Earlier, this bad bill passed the Assembly Appropriations Committtee on May 18 (Democrats for except Robert Rivas not voting, all 4 Republicans voted no). Previously, on April 25, this bad bill passed the Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee (all Democrats voted yes, voting no were Republicans Vince Fong and Joe Patterson, and Republican Bill Essayli abstained. On April 11, this bad bill passed the Assembly Health Committee (all the Democrats voted yes; voting no were Republicans Vince Fong, Joe Patterson, and Marie Waldron; abstaining was Republican Heath Flora.

AB 443 by Democrat Assemblymember and "LGBTQIA+" activist Corey Jackson builds upon last year's AB 2229, which aimed to prohibiting sincerely religious law enforcement officers. This new bill, AB 443, would require the state's Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training to unconstitutionally define “biased conduct” in order to punish current police officers and police force applicants based on what a state commission finds on social media. AB 443 reads: "The commission shall develop guidance for local law enforcement departments on performing effective Internet and social media screenings of officer applicants. The guidance shall include, at minimum, strategies for identifying applicant social media profiles and for searching for, and identifying, content indicative of potential biases, such as affiliation with hate groups." With family values organizations labeled as "hate groups" by the discredited SPLC, you know where this is going. Free-speech attorneys, prepare your federal lawsuits now!

Status | Votes: AB 443 passed the Democrat-controlled State Assembly on May 31. Voting yes were 58 Democrats + 2 Republicans (Greg Wallis of the Palm Springs area and Juan Alanis of Modesto/Turlock/Patterson area); zero legislators voted no; abstaining were the rest of the Republicans and 4 Democrats (Blanca Pacheco, James Ramos, Freddie Rodriguez, and Blanca Rubio). Earlier, this bad bill passed the Appropriations Committee on May 18 (Democrats voted yes, except Robert Rivas was not voting; Republican Megan Dahle voted no; Republicans who abstained were Diane Dixon, Devon Mathis, Kate Sanchez). Earlier, on March 14, this unconstitutional bill unanimously passed the Assembly Public Safety Committee (the 6 Democrats and 2 Republicans -- Juan Alanis and Tom Lackey -- all voted yes).

AB 492 by Democrat Assemblymember Gail Pellerin this bill would seek to spend state and federal funds to create a pilot project adding the treatment of "mild-to-moderate behaviorial health conditions" to Planned Parenthood and other abortionists, which are defined in the bill "as a Medi-Cal provider that is enrolled in the Family PACT Program and that provides abortion- and contraception-related services." This bill attempts to add to Planned Parenthood's cover story of "comprehensive," non-abortion "services," and at its core aims to replace wiser counsel from parents, pastors, and psychologists. Bottom line, AB 492 would spend taxpayer money on lie-based, pro-abortion counseling at Planned Parenthood killing centers. Mothers, babies, and taxpayers all lose.

Status | Votes: AB 492 passed the Democrat-controlled State Assembly on May 31. Voting yes were all 62 Democrats + 2 Republicans (Greg Wallis of the Palm Springs area and Juan Alanis of Modesto/Turlock/Patterson area); voting no were the remaining 16 Republicans. Earlier, this bad bill passed the Appropriations Committee on May 18 (Democrats voted yes, except Robert Rivas was not voting; all 4 Republicans vote no). Earlier, on April 18, this bad bill passed the Assembly Health Committee on a party-line vote (all 11 Democrats voted yes; all 4 Republicans voted no).

AB 576 by Democrat Assemblymember Akilah Weber would fully fund chemical abortions under the state's Medi-Cal (welfare) program. The previous version of the bill ordered the State of California to "fully reimburse providers for the provision of medication to terminate a pregnancy." However, the May 18 amendments to the bill, while striking this sentence, added new langugage to deceitfully permit the same thing:

SECTION 1. Section 14131.07 is added to the Welfare and Institutions Code, to read:
14131.07. (a) (1) By March 1, 2024, the department shall review and update Medi-Cal coverage policies for medication abortion to align with current evidence-based clinical guidelines.
(2) After the initial review, the department shall update its Medi-Cal coverage policies for medication abortion as needed to align with evidence-based clinical guidelines.
(b) For purposes of subdivision (a), the department shall allow flexibility for providers to exercise their clinical judgment when services are performed in a manner that aligns with one or more evidence-based clinical guidelines.

Status | Votes: AB 576 passed the Democrat-controlled State Assembly on May 31. Voting yes were 61 Democrats + 1 Republican (Greg Wallis of the Palm Springs area); voting no were the rest of the Republicans, except Diane Dixon abstained; also abstaining was Democrat Timothy Grayson. Earlier, this bad bill passed the Appropriations Committee on May 18 (Democrats voted yes, except Robert Rivas was not voting; all 4 Republicans vote no). Previously, this bad bill passed the  Assembly Health Committee on April 11 (voting yes were all the Democrats, except Carlos Villapudua abstained; voting no were all the Republicans).

AB 598 by Democrat Assemblymember Buffy Wicks would require that children at junior high and high schools all receive "physical or digital" referrals to abortions. The bill would also mandate the anti-family "California Healthy Kids Survey" upon all school districts to impose in grades 5, 7, 9, and 11. This bill would also require these invasive questionaires include "questions about sexual and reproductive health care as a core survey module for pupils in grades 7, 9, and 11."

Status | Votes: AB 598 passed the Democrat-controlled State Assembly on May 31. Voting yes were all 62 Democrats + 2 Republicans (Greg Wallis of the Palm Springs area and Juan Alanis of Modesto/Turlock/Patterson area); voting no were the remaining 16 Republicans. Earlier, this bad bill passed the Appropriations Committee on May 18 (Democrats voted yes, except Robert Rivas was not voting; all 4 Republicans vote no). Earlier, on April 12, this bad bill passed the Assembly Education Committee (all the Democrats voted yes; all the Republicans voted no).

AB 665 by Democrat Assemblymember Wendy Carrillo would permit minors 12 and above to consent to "mental health counseling" and "mental health treatment" at a government-funded "residential shelter." Parents would be cut out -- no parental notification or consent. Because children's brains are not fully developed until age 25, children cannot give informed consent, which is why parents are essential to making decisions on any medical or psychological treatment of their children. By removing any conditions for a child's "consent," AB 665 permits adults to both manipulate and legally "kidnap" impressionable children.

EXISTING LAW IN CALIFORNIA FAMILY CODE, SECTION (3)(B):

(b) A minor who is 12 years of age or older may consent to mental health treatment or counseling on an outpatient basis, or to residential shelter services, if both of the following requirements are satisfied:

(1) The minor, in the opinion of the attending professional person, is mature enough to participate intelligently in the outpatient services or residential shelter services.

(2) The minor (A) would present a danger of serious physical or mental harm to self or to others without the mental health treatment or counseling or residential shelter services, or (B) is the alleged victim of incest or child abuse.

AB 665 CHANGES IT TO THIS, REWORDING (3)(B) AND (B)(1), AND DELETING (B)(2)

(b) A minor who is 12 years of age or older may consent to mental health treatment or counseling on an outpatient basis, or to residential shelter services, if the minor, in the opinion of the attending professional person, is mature enough to participate intelligently in the outpatient services or residential shelter services.

This change would give children who are 12 years old and up 100% unconditional consent to receive “mental health treatment or counseling” or to go live at a “residential shelter," without parental consent and for no "abuse" reason. AB 665 would replace special-case, conditional "independence" in the current law by now letting a minor somehow "consent" to “treatment,” “counseling,” and a secret "residential shelter," without parental consent or even notification, and without any claim or evidence that the minor is an alleged victim of incest or child abuse, or that the minor "would present a danger of physical or mental harm to self or others."

Status | Votes: AB 665 is scheduled for a June 13 hearing in the State Senate Judiciary Committee. Previously, this bad bill passed the Assembly floor on April 10 with 55 yes votes (all Democrats), 10 no votes (all Republicans: Alanis, Megan Dahle, Dixon, Vince Fong, Gallagher, Lackey, Mathis, Joe Patterson, Ta), and the rest of the Republicans and several Democrats abstained. Previously, AB 665 passed the Assembly Judiciary Committee on March 28, during which all but one of the majority Democrats voted yes; voting no were Republicans Bill Essayli and Kate Sanchez; not voting were Republican Diane Dixon and Democrat Ash Kalra.

AB 957 by Democrat Assemblymember Lori Wilson would "require the court to strongly consider that affirming the minor’s gender identity is in the best interest of the child if a nonconsenting parent objects to a name change to conform to the minor’s gender identity." This unscientific, pro-child-mutiliation bill would make the courts go against what is truly best for children and families all the more.

Status | Votes: AB 957 has been referred to the State Senate Judiciary Committee after passing the Democrat-controlled Assembly floor on March 30. Assemblymembers voting yes were 50 Democrats and 1 Republican, Greg Wallis; voting no were 13 Republicans; abstaining were 12 Democrats and 4 Republicans (Juan Alanis, Philip Chen, Heath Flora, Devon Mathis). Previously, this bill on March 21 passed the Democrat-controlled Assembly Judiciary Committee (all 8 Democrats voted yes and all 3 Republicans voted no).

AB 1078 by Democrat Assemblymember and "LGBTQIA+" activist Corey Jackson, as amended May 2, now deceptively hides its intolerant "LGBTQIA+" agenda by mixing it in "Latino Americans" and "other ethnic, cultural, religious, and socioeconomic status groups."

Here's the new bill as amended:

SECTION 1. Section 60040 of the Education Code is amended to read:
60040. When adopting instructional materials for use in the schools, governing boards shall include only instructional materials that, in their determination, accurately portray the cultural and racial diversity of our society, including:
(a) The contributions of people of all gender expressions in all types of roles, including professional, vocational, and executive roles.
(b) The role and contributions of Native Americans, African Americans, Latino Americans, Asian Americans, Pacific Islanders, European Americans, LGBTQ+ Americans, persons with disabilities, and members of other ethnic, cultural, religious, and socioeconomic status groups to the total development of California and the United States.
(c) The role and contributions of the entrepreneur and labor in the total development of California and the United States.

SEC. 2. Section 60040.5 is added to the Education Code, to read:
60040.5. The department shall issue guidance related to how to help school districts, county offices of education, charter schools, and school personnel manage conversations about race and gender, and how to review instructional materials to ensure that they represent diverse perspectives and are culturally relevant.

SEC. 3. If the Commission on State Mandates determines that this act contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement to local agencies and school districts for those costs shall be made pursuant to Part 7 (commencing with Section 17500) of Division 4 of Title 2 of the Government Code.

Note how the amended AB 1078 still imposes new obligations and new mandates: As the Legislative Counsel's Digest describes, "the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require the State Department of Education to issue guidance related to how to help school districts, county offices of education, charter schools, and school personnel manage conversations about race and gender, and how to review instructional materials to ensure that they represent diverse perspectives and are culturally relevant."

Before being amended on May 2, this bad bill would have prohibited local school boards from "ceasing to teach any curriculum or removing any instructional materials" unless the State Board of Education approved it. This bill also would have required State Board of Education approval before "removing any books, publications, or papers from schools and school libraries." AB 1078 would have also required new instructional materials to "accurately portray...the contributions of people of all gender expressions...and the role and contributions of LGBTQ+ Americans."

Status | Votes: On May 30, AB 1078 passed the State Assembly. Voting yes were Republican Greg Wallis and all the Democrats (except Timothy Grayson, who abstained). The rest of the Republicans voted no, except Juan Alanis, who abstained. Earlier, on May 18, this bad bill passed the Appropriations Committee on May 18 (Democrats voted yes, except Robert Rivas was not voting; all 4 Republicans vote no). Previously, on April 26, this bad bill passed the Assembly Education Committee (all Democrats voted yes; both Republican voted no).

AB 1120 by Democrat Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel would require every government-controlled school "that serves pupils in grades 6 to 12" to "adopt a policy on universal mental health screening of pupils for youth behavior disorders." The big problem here is what is defined as a "youth behavior disorder?" Since more and more Democrat-driven agendas are to extinguish biblical or moral or traditional values, this bill could easily call right wrong and good bad. Another problem is AB 1120 does not require written, advance notification of parents or a clear opt-out, saying only that the local educational agency will determine "The manner in which parents or guardians of pupils will be notified and given the option to object to the mental health screenings."

Status: This bad bill is likely DEAD FOR THE YEAR. Its last action on March 29 in the Assembly Education Committee, but then, "Hearing canceled at the request of author."

AB 1194 by Democrat Assemblymember Wendy Carrillo would hide the fact that a minor girl is "accessing, procuring, or searching for abortion services." For all practical purposes, this means prohibiting saving these young mothers' lives if "something goes wrong." As the California-based Right to Life League explains: "The bill does not protect consumers; rather it is designed to protect abortion providers at the cost of women’s health. AB 1194 creates an exception to the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020 (CPRA) which will block the ability to disclose personal information of a consumer where the consumer is at risk of danger of death or serious physical injury. The bill does so by proclaiming that a consumer who seeks abortion care services does not constitute a natural person being at risk or danger of death or serious physical injury. This carve out makes no sense and is very dangerous for women. AB 1194 ignores the very real physical risk to women of surgical and chemical abortions. Surgical abortions can result in the death of women. According to the FDA, 28 women have died in association with taking the abortion pill."

Status | Votes: AB 1194 has been transmitted to the State Senate after passing the State Assembly on May 22. Voting yes were 61 Democrats + 3 Republicans: Alanis, Mathis, Wallis); voting no were 8 Republicans (Megan Dahle, Essayli, Flora, Vince Fong, Gallagher, Joe Patterson, Sanchez, Ta); abstaining were 7 Republicans (Chen, Dixon, Hoover, Kalra, Lackey, Jim Patterson, Waldron) and 1 Democrat (Quirk-Silva). Previously, this bad bill on May 10 passed the Democrat-controlled Assembly Appropriations Committee (voting yes were all the Democrats, voting no were Republicans Megan Dahle and Kate Sanchez, and not voting were Republicans Diane Dixon and Devon Mathis). Earlier, on April 25, this bad bill passed the  Committee (Democrats voted yes; Republican Vince Fong voted no; Republicans Bill Essayli and Joe Patterson did not vote).

AB 1432 by Democrat Assemblymember Wendy Carrillo would require group health insurance carriers that sell policies in California to "cover" the killing of preborn babies via abortion and "sex changes" (the bill calls this "gender-affirming care"). Beyond the lie and harm of these "operations," AB 1432 would raise the cost of insurance for the rest of us.

Status | Votes: AB 1432 has been transmitted to the State Senate after passing the State Assembly on May 18. Voting yes were 59 Democrats + 2 Republicans (Alanis, Wallis); voting no were 13 Republicans (Chen, Megan Dahle, Davies, Essayli, Flora, Gallagher, Hoover, Lackey, Mathis, Jim Patterson, Joe Patterson, Sanchez, Ta); abstaining were 3 Republicans (Dixon, Vince Fong, Waldron) and 3 Democrats (Cervantes, Friedman, Wilson). Earlier, this bad bill on May 10 passed the Democrat-controlled Assembly Appropriations Committee (voting yes were all the Democrats; voting no were Republicans Megan Dahle, Diane Dixon and Kate Sanchez; not voting was Republican Devon Mathis). Previously, AB 1432 passed the Assembly Health Committee on April 18 (all Democrats voted yes, all Republicans voted no).

AB 1450 by Democrat Assemblymember and "LGBTQIA+" activist Corey Jackson would require every California government-run elementary and secondary school "to conduct universal screenings for adverse childhood experiences." But what defines whether an experience was "adverse"? Under AB 1450, will good parents' loving training and discipline be labeled "adverse," so get these children into "re-education" counseling right away? The bill contains no written, advance notification of parents or a clear opt-out.

Status: AB 1450 is likely DEAD FOR THE YEAR because it never had a hearing in the Assembly Education Committee and never passed that committee or any other committees.

Pro-'LGBTQIA+' Resolutions

HR 33 and SR 33 are resolutions (public statements of the Legislature) with the same text, except for the Assembly and Senate labels in the final paragraphs.

HR 33 includes the following proclamations:

• "lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer people are...serving as role models for all"
• "Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer people...enrich our national life"
• "An unprecedented number of adults in the United States identify as LGBTQ+, with a jump from 5.6 percent to 7.1 percent of Americans who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or queer in 2022. Young people, especially Generation Z, are driving the increase"
• "The transgender community in particular, has gained newfound prominence in the media, entertainment, sports, and business, raising awareness about gender identity and the obstacles this community continues to face"
• "In January 2023, California became the first state legislature in the nation to reach 10 percent representation for LGBTQ+ individuals"
• "Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer rights are targeted by state legislators all across the nation with over 450 anti-LGBTQ+ bills introduced in 2023 alone, according to American Civil Liberties Union. Making it increasingly pertinent for advocates and lawmakers to continue fighting for and protecting LGBTQ+ rights in the state of California."
• "the Assembly proclaims June 2023 as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer (LGBTQ+) Pride Month, urges all Californians to join in celebrating the culture, accomplishments, and contributions of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer people, and encourages the people of California to work to help advance the cause of equality for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer people, and their families"

HOW THEY VOTED: On June 5, HR 33 was adopted by a voice vote on the Assembly floor, after individual votes to add coauthors. Joining most of the Democrats as coauthors were Republicans Juan Alanis, Marie Waldron, Greg Wallis. Also on June 5, SR 33 was approved by individual votes of state senators -- 30 Democrats + Republican Rosilicie Ochoa Bogh voted yes, while 7 Republicans abstained, as did Democrats Dave Min and Anthony Portantino.

ACA 5 'Marriage Equality'

ACA 5 is coauthored by 71 Democrat senators and assemblymembers, plus 1 Republican assemblymember, Greg Wallis. If passed by two-thirds of both houses of the California State Legislature, this proposed state constitutional amendment would place so-called "marriage equality" on the California ballot.

This is all about symbolism and truth versus lies. In 2008, California voters placed into the California State Constitution, "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California." But in 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal striking down Prop. 8, and homosexual marriages started happening in California. In 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court opined that homosexuals can obtain marriage licenses in all 50 states. And even though Prop. 8 is legally dead, "LGBTQIA+" activists hate seeing the 14 words of truth about marriage in the California Constitution. So they're trying to remove it the only way possible, by passing a state constitutional amendment and getting a majority of California voters to support it.

Status: On June 1, ACA 5 was referred to the Assembly Judiciary Committee and the Assembly Appropriations Committee and might be voted upon on the Assembly floor this June.

Bad bills by Senate Democrats

SB 36 by Democrat State Senator Nancy Skinner would prevent California judges, law enforcement, or bail professionals from helping save pre-born human life or save kids from "LGBTQIA+" mutilation. As the Democrat-run Public Safety Committee said, SB 36 does four things to prohibit any California "authority" from helping with the arrest and detention of out-of-state residents seeking California abortions and "sex changes":

(1) Prohibit a magistrate from issuing a warrant for the arrest of a bail fugitive whose alleged offense or conviction is for the violation of another state’s laws that criminalize abortion, contraception, reproductive care, or gender-affirming care that is otherwise lawful under the laws of this state, regardless of the individual’s location;
2) State that it is a misdemeanor for a bail fugitive recovery agent or bail bondsman to take into custody a bail fugitive whose alleged offense or conviction is for the violation of another state’s laws that criminalize abortion, contraception, reproductive care, or genderaffirming care that is otherwise lawful under the laws of this state and makes them ineligible for a license to operate in California;
3) Prohibit a state or local law enforcement agency from providing information or assistance to specified entities regarding legally protected health care activity, which includes abortion, contraception, reproductive care, or gender-affirming care that is otherwise lawful under the laws of this state; and,
4) State that a person who is fleeing to avoid prosecution, or custody and confinement after conviction, for the above-described acts, is not ineligible for the California Work Opportunity

Status | Votes: SB 36 is likely DEAD FOR THE YEAR because never escaped the State Senate Appropriations Committee by its May 19 deadline. Last action on May 18: "Held in committee and under submission." Earlier, on April 18, this bad bill passed the Senate Judiciary Committee (all the Democrats voted yes, except Angelique Ashby abstained; all the Republicans voted no). Earlier, on March 14, this bill passed the Senate Public Safety Committee (all 4 Democrats voted yes, and the sole Republican abstained).

SB 58 by Democrat State Senator and "LGBTQIA+" activist Scott Wiener would legalize the mind-altering, "hallucinogenic substances" of psilocybin, psilocyn, dimethyltryptamine (DMT), ibogaine, and mescaline. This bill, by legalizing these harmful, "recreational drugs" for 21-year-olds, would, for all practical purposes, open the door to teens and pre-teens getting it. A stoned society is not a safe society.

Status | Votes: SB 58 has been transmitted to the State Assembly after passing the State Senate on May 24 with a bare minimum 21 yes votes from Democrats. Voting no were all 8 Republicans + 6 Democrats (Alvarado-Gil, Ashby, Glazer, Hurtado, Umberg, Wahab). Abstaining were 3 Democrats (Blakespear, Limón, Min). Earlier, this bad bill on May 1 passed the Democrat-controlled Senate Appropriations Committee. Previously, on March 21, this bad bill passed the Democrat-controlled State Senate Public Safety Committee by the narrowest of margins (3 Democrats voted yes, Democrat Aisha Wahab voted no, while Republican Rosilicie Ochoa Bogh did not vote).

SB 59 by Democrat State Senator Nancy Skinner would dramatically expand "free menstual products" in California. If this bill were only about using taxpayer money to "stock menstrual products" in women's restrooms in state-and-local-government buildings and state-funded hospitals, it would simply be another big-government "nanny government" program. Yet by mimicking existing bad law requiring "free menstual products" at certain public schools' "all-gender restrooms, and in at least one men’s restroom," SB 59 descends into lunacy by claiming men have a uterus that can discharge blood, and requiring menstual pads "in at least one men’s restroom" in government buildings and most hospitals. If this passes, expect a future bill that would require "free menstual products" be stocked by private-sector businesses.

Status | Votes: SB 59 is likely DEAD FOR THE YEAR because it did not escape the State Senate Appropriations Committee's "suspense file" by the May 19 deadline. Earlier, on March 29, this bill was approved by the Democrat-controlled Senate Health Committee (voting yes were all 10 Democrats, voting no was Republican Shannon Grove, abstaining was Republican Janet Nguyen). Earlier, on March 14, this bad bill passed the Senate Governmental Organization (all Democrats voted yes; all Republicans voted no).

SB 274 by Democrat State Senator Nancy Skinner would eliminate government-school suspensions or expulsions based on "disrupting school activities" or "willful defiance" of teachers, staff, or school administrators. Yet the SB 274 amendments still permit teachers to suspend disruptive or defiant students for less than two days -- "for the day of the suspension and the day following." Thinking it is inappropriate to expect children to be trained or disciplined, SB 274, according to the Democrat-run Legislative Counsel's Office, "would extend the prohibition against the suspension of pupils, including pupils enrolled in a charter school, for disrupting school activities or otherwise willfully defying the valid authority of supervisors, teachers, administrators, school officials, or other school personnel engaged in the performance of their duties to all grades, indefinitely, but would retain a teacher’s existing authorization to suspend any pupil from class for any of the listed acts, including willful defiance, for the day of the suspension and the day following, as provided." In addition, SB 274 would prohibit suspensions or expulsions based on a student's unexcused absences.

Status | Votes: SB 274 on May 18 was referred to the Assembly Education Committee after passing the State Senate on May 11 (all Democrats voted yes and so did Republicans Brian Dahle, Janet Nguyen, Rosilicie Ochoa Bogh, and Scott Wilk; voting no were Republicans Brian Jones, Roger Niello, and Kelly Seyarto; abstaining was Republican Shannon Grove). On April 12, this bad bill passed the Senate Education Committee (joining all the Democrats in voting yes were both Republicans, Rosilicie Ochoa Bogh and Scott Wilk).

SB 345 by Democrat State Senator Nancy Skinner would make California even more pro-abortion and pro-"sex changes" than ever. The bill would stop any preborn baby from being referred to as "child" and "person" in California's statutes. SB 345 also aims to remove all legal hurdles to children from other states being brought to California for abortions and "sex change" procedures and operations. What's more, the bill would eliminate certain peaceful, free speech activities of California pro-lifers, banning any business from sharing data "that contains the personally identifying information of a person physically located in or in close proximity to a family planning center." And SB 345 would exempt from murder "a mother who committed the act that resulted in the death of the fetus."

Specifically, this bill does its utmost to hide abortions done on minors and "sex changes" done on minors as "legally protected health care activities." SB 345 would prohibit the state's medical, dental, and other medical boards from suspending or revoking a license from providing a service or treatment of a "legally protected health care activity," which the bill defines as "reproductive health care services or gender-affirming health care service." Expanding existing pro-abortion law, SB 345 would declare criminal or civil action by other states over those bringing pregnant teenagers across state lines to California to be "contrary to the public policy of this state" and states that "California law governs in any action against a person who provides or receives by any means, including telehealth, reproductive health care services or gender-affirming health care services."

In addition, SB 345 declares that "interference" and any "public act or record of a foreign jurisdiction" suing any California entity in order to rescue children from "reproductive or gender-affirming health care services" is "a violation of public policy." What's more, the bill permits any Californian who's sued for violating another jurisdiction's policies against aborting babies and mutilating children via "sex change" procedures/operations to countersue the initiator of the lawsuit as a perpetrator of "abusive litigation." And SB 345 would require California courts to "stay" ("pause") another state's money judgment for the liability of spriting away minors for dangerous abortions and injurious "sex changes." Finally, this bill prohibits the governor of California from extraditing to another state anyone in California who's been charged by another state for pushing an abortion or "sex change" on a minor, and prohibits state and local law enforcement from doing anything to apprehend the suspect.

SB 345 would also legalize DIY abortions and perhaps even infanticide by exempting from a charge of murder "a mother who committed the act that resulted in the death of the fetus." What's more, throughout California statutes, SB 345 would replace “unborn child” with “fetus," and “unborn person” with “unborn beneficiary.”

Status | Votes: SB 345 passed the Democrat-controlled State Senate on May 31. Voting yes were all 32 Democrats; voting no were all 8 Republicans. Earlier, this bad bill on May 18 passed the Senate Appropriations Committee (Democrat yes, Republicans no). Previously, on April 25, this bad bill passed the Senate Judiciary Committee (all Democrats voted yes except for Democrat Henry Stern, who did not vote; both Republicans voted no). Earlier, this bad bill was approved April 18 by the Senate Public Safety Committee (Democrats yes, Republicans no).

SB 385 by Democrat State Senator and former abortion clinic director Toni Atkins would expand on last year's bill allowing nurses -- and now letting physician assistants -- to engage in "performing an abortion by aspiration techniques" (a suction abortion that vacuums a preborn baby -- dismembering, torturing, and killing a little boy or girl). SB 385 would also lower training standards for physician assistants performing abortions (this means greater risk to mothers). What's more, SB 385 would remove virtually all legal and regulatory accountability, declaring, "A person authorized to perform abortion by aspiration techniques...shall not be punished, held liable for damages in a civil action, or denied any right or privilege for any action relating to the evaluation of clinical competency of a physician assistant." This bill is an abortionist's dream (and the worst nightmare for preborn babies).

Status | Votes: SB 385 has been double-referred to the Assembly Business and Professions Committee and the Assembly Judiciary Committee. Earlier, on May 8, this bad bill passed the Democrat-controlled State Senate floor (voting yes were 28 Democrats, voting no were all 8 Republicans, and abstaining were 4 Democrats: Marie Alvarado-Gil, Melissa Hurtado, Dave Min, and Richard Roth). Previously, on May 1, this bad bill passed the Senate Appropriations Committee. Earlier, this bill passed the Senate Judiciary Committee (all the Democrats voted yes; all the Republicans voted no). Previously, this bad bill passed April 10 in the Democrat-controlled Senate Business, Professions and Economic Development Committee. Voting yes were all the Democrats; all the Republicans voted no.

SB 407 by Democrat State Senator and "LGBTQIA+" activist Scott Wiener would make California foster parents -- even those with biblical, moral values -- support the "LGBTQIA+" agenda to the extreme, or else they can't be foster parents. According to the Democrat-run Legislative Counsel's Office, as amended April 27, SB 407 would:

• "require a resource family to demonstrate the capacity to meet the needs of a child, regardless of the child’s sexual orientation or gender identity, as specified."
  
  
• "require the applicant to demonstrate that understanding through signing a document acknowledging foster youth rights."
  
  
• "This bill would expressly include among those the rights of LGBTQ+ and gender-expansive youth among those rights of which an applicant is required to demonstrate an understanding. The bill would also require the applicant to demonstrate that understanding through signing a document acknowledging foster youth rights."
  
  
• "This bill would require the department to require the above-described standardized documentation to include documents for assessing the ability to care for and supervise children and youth of all sexual orientations and gender identities and to ensure that county-approved resource families are upholding the rights of a child in foster care and meeting the resource family’s responsibility to safeguard those rights, including the right to have fair and equal access to all available services, placement, care, treatment, and benefits, and to not be subjected to discrimination or harassment on the basis of actual or perceived race, ethnic group identification, ancestry, national origin, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, mental or physical disability, or HIV status. The bill would require the department to work with stakeholders, including counties, the California Alliance of Child and Family Services, and LGBTQ advocates, to develop standards and a caregiver handbook for caring for children and youth of all sexual orientations and gender identities."

Status | Votes: SB 407 has been transmitted to the State Assembly after passing the State Senate on May 24 (31 Democrats yes, 5 Republicans no -- Jones, Nguyen, Niello, Seyarto, Wilk -- and abstaining were 3 Republicans (Dahle, Grove, Ochoa Bogh) + 1 Democrat (Limón). Earlier, on May 18, this bad bill passed the Senate Appropriations Committee (Democrats yes, Republicans no). Previously, on April 25, this bad bill passed the Senate Judiciary Committee (all Democrats voted yes except for Democrat Henry Stern, who did not vote; both Republicans voted no). Earlier, on April 17, this bad bill passed the Senate Human Services Committee by just one vote (3 Democrats voted yes, Democrat Melissa Hurtado abstained and so did Republican Rosilicie Ochoa Bogh).

SB 541 by Democrat State Senator and "LGBTQIA+" activist Caroline Menjivar requires "internal and external condoms" to be made available to all pupils free of charge" in grades 9 through 12 at government-controlled junior high and high schools (includes charter schools). SB 541 would also permit school districts to give condoms to children as young as 7th grade.  This bill would also "prohibit a retail establishment, as defined, from refusing to furnish nonprescription contraception to a person solely on the basis of age by means of any conduct, including, but not limited to, requiring the customer to present identification for purposes of demonstrating their age." What's more, the bill would subsidize with taxpayer money Gardasil injections (the so-called "HPV vaccine) by the abortion giant Planned Parenthood and others that provide "comprehensive clinical family planning services."

What's more, SB 541 prohibits schools from stopping "school-based health centers" from "making internal and external condoms available and easily accessible to pupils." And if there's no budget money for SB 541's condom distribution, "The bill would authorize a state agency, the State Department of Education, or a public school to accept gifts, grants, and donations from any source for the support of a public school carrying out these provisions, including, but not limited to, the acceptance of condoms from a manufacturer or wholesaler."

Status | Votes: SB 541 passed the Democrat-controlled State Senate on May 31. Voting yes were 31 Democrats; voting no were all 8 Republicans + Democrat Marie Alvarado-Gil. Earlier, this bad bill on May 18 passed the Senate Appropriations Committee on a party-line vote -- Democrats for; Republicans against. Previously, on April 12, this bad bill passed the Senate Health Committee (all Democrats voted yes; voting no was Republican Janet Nguyen; abstaining was Republican Shannon Grove. Earlier, on March 29 SB 41 passed the Senate Education Committee (all Democrats voted yes; both Republicans voted no).

SB 760, authored by Democrat State Senator Josh Newman and co-authored by four other openly homosexual Democrat legislators, would require all K-12 government schools, including charter schools, to have "at least one all-gender restroom...stocked with menstrual products."

Status | Votes: SB 760 passed the Democrat-controlled State Senate on May 31. Voting yes were all 32 Democrats + Republican Rosilicie Ochoa Bogh: voting no were 6 Republicans: Brian Dahle, Shannon Grove, Brian Jones, Janet Nguyen, Roger Niello, and Kelly Seyarto; abstaining was Republican Scott Wilk. Previously, on May 18, this bad bill passed the Senate Appropriations Committtee (Democrats yes, 1 Republicans no). Earlier, on April 12, this bad bill passed the State Senate Education Committee. Voting yes were all 4 Democrats and Republican Rosilicie Ochoa Bogh; abstaining was Republican Scott Wilk.

INSIGHT: Why do so many bad bills pass and good bills fail?

Who's behind the aborting of pre-born babies with your tax dollars, the brainwashing of children, tyranny against free speech, religious freedom, and private property, a lot of sexually-transmitted diseases, depression and suicide stemming from sexual addictions?

In California, the abortion industry and homosexual-bisexual-transsexual activists and their Democrat politicians, who dominate the California State Legislature, are pushing a raft of awful bills. And by extension, anyone who supports abortion or "gay rights" and votes for Democrats is, intentionally or unintentionally, behind these bills too.

For example, "Equality California," composed of homosexual and transsexual activists, pushes an endless number of "genders," opposes parental rights, religious freedom, private property rights, and fairness for dissenting views; and defies science proving the harm of homosexuality, bisexuality, and transsexuality. Yet no one can change their sex.

2022 Bills we tracked + their outcomes

See the 2022 legislative year's bills and their outcomes