California 2019-2020 Regular Session Status: In Committee

SB 561 — California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018: consumer remedies.

Last action — Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 56.

Track this bill free

No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.

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

This bill died with 2019-2020 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This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.

Summary

(1) Existing law, the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018, beginning on January 1, 2020, grants a consumer various rights with regard to personal information relating to that consumer that is held by a business, including the right to know what personal information is collected by a business and to have information held by that business deleted, as specified. The act specifically authorizes a consumer whose nonencrypted or nonredacted personal information, as defined, is subject to unauthorized access and exfiltration, theft, or disclosure as a result of the business's failure to maintain reasonable security procedures to institute a civil action for various damages. This bill would expand a consumer's rights to bring a civil action for damages to apply to other violations under the act. (2) Under existing law, a business or third party may seek the opinion of the Attorney General for guidance on how to comply with the act. This bill would instead specify that the Attorney General may publish materials that provide businesses and others with general guidance on how to comply with the act. (3) Under existing law, a business, service provider, or other person that violates the act is subject to an injunction and is liable for a civil penalty for each violation, which is assessed and recovered in a civil action by the Attorney General. Existing law specifies that a business is in violation of the act if it fails to cure an alleged violation within 30 days after being notified of alleged noncompliance. This bill would delete the 30-day period in which to cure after receiving notice of an alleged violation. The bill would also make related and conforming changes to those provisions.

Bill Text

What changed in the latest version

1 added · 1 removed

1 line(s) added, 1 removed.

→
Previous
Latest
Bill Number Bill Keyword Home Bill Information California Law Publications Other Resources My Subscriptions My Favorites Bill Information >> Bill Search >> Text Bill TextBill Information PDF2 Bill PDF |Add To My Favorites | Version:
Bill Number Bill Keyword Home Bill Information California Law Publications Other Resources My Subscriptions My Favorites Bill Information >> Bill Search >> Text Bill Text PDF2 Bill PDF |Add To My Favorites | Version:
⬇ Download PDF
View plain text versions (2)

Action History

  1. Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 56.

  2. May 16 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.

  3. Set for hearing May 16.

  4. April 29 hearing: Placed on APPR. suspense file.

  5. Set for hearing April 29.

  6. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 2. Page 653.) (April 9). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  7. Set for hearing April 9.

  8. Referred to Com. on JUD.

  9. Read first time.

  10. From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 27.

  11. Introduced. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.

Sponsors

  • Jackson · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

  • Jackson

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

Placed on suspense file

Passed 6 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Republican 1000
Unaffiliated 5000
Total 6000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (6)
Member Party Vote
Wieckowski — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Bates — Yea
Hill — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

civil-rights technology
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 SB 561 do?
(1) Existing law, the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018, beginning on January 1, 2020, grants a consumer various rights with regard to personal information relating to that consumer that is held by a business, including the right to know what personal information is collected by a business and to have information held by that business deleted, as specified. The act specifically authorizes a consumer whose nonencrypted or nonredacted personal information, as defined, is subject to unauthorized access and exfiltration, theft, or disclosure as a result of the business's failure to maintain reasonable security procedures to institute a civil action for various damages. This bill would expand a consumer's rights to bring a civil action for damages to apply to other violations under the act. (2) Under existing law, a business or third party may seek the opinion of the Attorney General for guidance on how to comply with the act. This bill would instead specify that the Attorney General may publish materials that provide businesses and others with general guidance on how to comply with the act. (3) Under existing law, a business, service provider, or other person that violates the act is subject to an injunction and is liable for a civil penalty for each violation, which is assessed and recovered in a civil action by the Attorney General. Existing law specifies that a business is in violation of the act if it fails to cure an alleged violation within 30 days after being notified of alleged noncompliance. This bill would delete the 30-day period in which to cure after receiving notice of an alleged violation. The bill would also make related and conforming changes to those provisions.
Who sponsors SB 561?
SB 561 is sponsored by Jackson.
What is the current status of SB 561?
This bill died with 2019-2020 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 SB 561?
Track SB 561 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 561

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 SB 561

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →