California 20252026 Regular Session Status: Introduced 1 D cosponsors

AB 2014 — Habeas corpus: gender-based stereotypes.

Last action — In committee: Held under submission.

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

This bill has been introduced in the Assembly. Introduced February 17, 2026. It must pass committee before a floor vote.

Next likely step: a committee referral and hearing.

Prognosis

Stalled 28% · moderate confidence

Where this bill stands today.

Odds of enactment

Low

How often bills like it became law.

  • Introduced

    Current position in the legislative process.

  • 1 sponsor

    1 primary, 0 co-sponsors signed on.

  • Single-party support

    Sponsorship is currently within one party (1 D).

  • Cleared a recorded vote

    Passed 1 recorded vote so far.

Prognosis reads this bill's own signals — stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes and cross-state momentum. Odds come from a model trained on which bills have become law.

In plain language

The bill allows habeas corpus claims based on gender-based stereotype evidence in criminal trials.

This bill permits individuals to challenge their imprisonment if gender-based stereotypes influenced their trial. It highlights considerations for evidence related to gender biases.

What this means for you
  • Workers: This may affect workers involved in criminal cases where gender bias influences legal outcomes.

Summary

Existing law authorizes every person who is unlawfully imprisoned or restrained of their liberty to prosecute a writ of habeas corpus to inquire into the cause of that imprisonment or restraint. Existing law also authorizes a writ of habeas corpus to be prosecuted on the basis that competent and substantial expert testimony relating to intimate partner battering and its effects was not presented to the trier of fact at the trial court proceedings and is of such substance that, had the competent and substantial expert testimony been presented, there is a reasonable probability, sufficient to undermine confidence in the judgment of conviction or sentence, that the result of the proceedings would have been different. This bill would additionally authorize a writ of habeas corpus to be prosecuted on the basis that evidence or argument likely to trigger gender-based stereotypes was admitted or relied upon by the prosecution at trial in a manner that created a reasonable probability that the outcome would have been different if such evidence was not admitted or argument offered. The bill would provide that evidence or argument likely to trigger gender-based stereotypes includes, but is not limited to, information concerning a defendant's sexual activity, sexual orientation, sexual partners, reproductive choices, gender presentation, clothing, or romantic relationships, when offered in a matter that may invoke gender-based stereotypes. The California Constitution provides for the Right to Truth-in-Evidence, which requires a 23 vote of the Legislature to exclude any relevant evidence from any criminal proceeding, as specified. Because this bill may result in the exclusion of evidence that would otherwise be admissible in a criminal proceeding, the bill would require a 23 vote of the Legislature.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. In committee: Held under submission.

  2. Joint Rule 62(a), file notice suspended. (Page 5030.)

  3. In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.

  4. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 7. Noes 2.) (April 21). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  5. Re-referred to Com. on PUB. S.

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

  7. In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.

  8. Referred to Com. on PUB. S.

  9. From printer. May be heard in committee March 20.

  10. Read first time. To print.

Sponsors

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on · 2 voted No

Sponsors (1)

Co-sponsors (0)

None.

Not signed on (121)

121 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 121 →

"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

Votes

Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]

Passed 7 Yea · 2 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 7000
Republican 0200
Total 7200
% of votes cast 78%22%0%0%
How each member voted (9)
Member Party Vote
González, Mark Democratic Yea
Haney, Matt Democratic Yea
Harabedian, John Democratic Yea
Nguyen, Stephanie Democratic Yea
Ramos, James C. Democratic Yea
Schultz, Nick Democratic Yea
Sharp-Collins, LaShae Democratic Yea
Alanis, Juan Republican Nay
Lackey, Tom Republican Nay

Official roll call →

Subjects

civil-rights
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 2014 do?
Existing law authorizes every person who is unlawfully imprisoned or restrained of their liberty to prosecute a writ of habeas corpus to inquire into the cause of that imprisonment or restraint. Existing law also authorizes a writ of habeas corpus to be prosecuted on the basis that competent and substantial expert testimony relating to intimate partner battering and its effects was not presented to the trier of fact at the trial court proceedings and is of such substance that, had the competent and substantial expert testimony been presented, there is a reasonable probability, sufficient to undermine confidence in the judgment of conviction or sentence, that the result of the proceedings would have been different. This bill would additionally authorize a writ of habeas corpus to be prosecuted on the basis that evidence or argument likely to trigger gender-based stereotypes was admitted or relied upon by the prosecution at trial in a manner that created a reasonable probability that the outcome would have been different if such evidence was not admitted or argument offered. The bill would provide that evidence or argument likely to trigger gender-based stereotypes includes, but is not limited to, information concerning a defendant's sexual activity, sexual orientation, sexual partners, reproductive choices, gender presentation, clothing, or romantic relationships, when offered in a matter that may invoke gender-based stereotypes. The California Constitution provides for the Right to Truth-in-Evidence, which requires a 23 vote of the Legislature to exclude any relevant evidence from any criminal proceeding, as specified. Because this bill may result in the exclusion of evidence that would otherwise be admissible in a criminal proceeding, the bill would require a 23 vote of the Legislature.
Who sponsors AB 2014?
AB 2014 is sponsored by Elhawary, Sade (Democratic).
What is the current status of AB 2014?
This bill has been introduced in the Assembly. Introduced February 17, 2026. It must pass committee before a floor vote.
Where can I track AB 2014?
Track AB 2014 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 2014

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 2014

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →