California 2023-2024 Regular Session Status: In Committee Bipartisan · 7 R · 2 D cosponsors

AB 475 — Sensitive military land: foreign ownership and interests: prohibited foreign actors.

Last action — From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. 2
    In Committee
  3. 3
    Passed Assembly
  4. 4
    Passed Senate
  5. 5
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill died with 2023-2024 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.

This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there are no live odds of enactment. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.

Summary

Existing law provides that all property has an owner, whether that owner is the state, and the property is public, or the owner is an individual, and the property is private. Existing law establishes the California National Guard and regulates the operation of that force. The United States Constitution authorizes Congress to provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States. This bill would prohibit a prohibited foreign actor, as defined, from purchasing, acquiring, leasing, or holding an interest, as defined, in any land that is located within 50 miles of a United States military base or California National Guard base within the State of California. The bill would exempt land held by a prohibited foreign actor before January 1, 2024, from that prohibition. The bill would provide land transferred in violation of these provisions would be subject to divestiture, as specified. The bill would provide that these provisions may not be applied in a manner inconsistent with any provision of any treaty between the United States and another country.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56.

  2. Died pursuant to Art. IV, Sec. 10(c) of the Constitution.

  3. Re-referred to Com. on JUD.

  4. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on JUD. Read second time and amended.

  5. Re-referred to Com. on JUD.

  6. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on JUD. Read second time and amended.

  7. Referred to Coms. on JUD. and M. & V.A.

  8. From printer. May be heard in committee March 10.

  9. Read first time. To print.

Sponsors

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 10 co-sponsors · 111 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

  • Mathis

Co-sponsors (10)

Not signed on (111)

111 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 111 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Subjects

public-safety immigration veterans
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does AB 475 do?
Existing law provides that all property has an owner, whether that owner is the state, and the property is public, or the owner is an individual, and the property is private. Existing law establishes the California National Guard and regulates the operation of that force. The United States Constitution authorizes Congress to provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States. This bill would prohibit a prohibited foreign actor, as defined, from purchasing, acquiring, leasing, or holding an interest, as defined, in any land that is located within 50 miles of a United States military base or California National Guard base within the State of California. The bill would exempt land held by a prohibited foreign actor before January 1, 2024, from that prohibition. The bill would provide land transferred in violation of these provisions would be subject to divestiture, as specified. The bill would provide that these provisions may not be applied in a manner inconsistent with any provision of any treaty between the United States and another country.
Who sponsors AB 475?
AB 475 is sponsored by Mathis, Quirk-Silva, Sharon (Democratic), Alanis, Juan (Republican), Dixon, Diane (Republican), Flora, Heath (Republican), Hoover, Josh (Republican), Dahle, Jones, Brian W. (Republican), Niello, Roger W. (Republican), Seyarto, Kelly (Republican), and Nguyen, Stephanie (Democratic).
What is the current status of AB 475?
This bill died with 2023-2024 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
Where can I track AB 475?
Track AB 475 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 475

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of AB 475

Last checked for changes 2 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →