California 2015-2016 Regular Session Status: Enacted 1 D cosponsors

SB 178 — Privacy: electronic communications: search warrant.

Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 651, Statutes of 2015.

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

This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 09, 2015. Enacted.

Odds of enactment

High chance

Based on the sponsor, cosponsors, and committee posture, this bill has a high chance of becoming law.

Upgrade to see the exact probability and what's driving it.

A statistical estimate from our own model of past outcomes — an insight, not a guarantee. Policymaking is volatile.

Prognosis

Likely to advance 82% · moderate confidence
  • Enacted

    Current position in the legislative process.

  • 17 sponsors

    1 primary, 16 co-sponsors signed on.

  • Single-party support

    Sponsorship is currently within one party (1 D).

  • Cleared a recorded vote

    Passed 9 recorded votes so far.

Based on stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes, and cross-state momentum — a description of the observable signals, not a prediction.

Summary

(1) Existing law provides that a search warrant may only be issued upon probable cause, supported by affidavit, naming or describing the person to be searched or searched for, and particularly describing the property, thing, or things and the place to be searched. Existing law also states the grounds upon which a search warrant may be issued, including, among other grounds, when the property or things to be seized consist of any item or constitute any evidence that tends to show a felony has been committed, or tends to show that a particular person has committed a felony, or when there is a warrant to arrest a person. This bill would prohibit a government entity from compelling the production of or access to electronic communication information or electronic device information, as defined, without a search warrant, wiretap order, order for electronic reader records, or subpoena issued pursuant under specified conditions, except for emergency situations, as defined. The bill would also specify the conditions under which a government entity may access electronic device information by means of physical interaction or electronic communication with the device, such as pursuant to a search warrant, wiretap order, or consent of the owner of the device. The bill would define a number of terms for those purposes, including, among others, "electronic communication information" and "electronic device information," which the bill defines collectively as "electronic information." The bill would require a search warrant for electronic information to describe with particularity the information to be seized and would impose other conditions on the use of the search warrant or wiretap order and the information obtained, including retention, sealing, and disclosure. The bill would require a warrant directed to a service provider to be accompanied by an order requiring the service provider to verify by affidavit the authenticity of electronic information that it produces, as specified. The bill would authorize a service provider to voluntarily disclose, when not otherwise prohibited by state or federal law, electronic communication information or subscriber information, and would require a government entity to destroy information so provided within 90 days, subject to specified exceptions. The bill would, subject to exceptions, require a government entity that executes a search warrant pursuant to these provisions to contemporaneously provide notice, as specified, to the identified target, that informs the recipient that information about the recipient has been compelled or requested, and that states the nature of the government investigation under which the information is sought. The bill would authorize a delay of 90 days, subject to renewal, for providing the notice under specified conditions that constitute an emergency. The bill would require the notice to include a copy of the warrant or statement describing the emergency under which the notice was delayed. The bill would provide that any person in a trial, hearing, or proceeding may move to suppress any electronic information obtained or retained in violation of its provisions, according to specified procedures. The bill would provide that a California or foreign corporation, and its officers, employees, and agents, are not subject to any cause of action for providing records, information, facilities, or assistance in accordance with the terms of a warrant, wiretap order, or other order issued pursuant to these provisions. (2) 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 would exclude evidence obtained or retained in violation of its provisions in a criminal proceeding, it requires a 23 vote of the Legislature.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 651, Statutes of 2015.

  2. Approved by the Governor.

  3. Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 10:45 p.m.

  4. Assembly amendments concurred in. (Ayes 34. Noes 4. Page 2644.) Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.

  5. In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.

  6. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 57. Noes 13. Page 2974.) Ordered to the Senate.

  7. Action rescinded whereby the bill was read a third time and amended.

  8. Ordered to third reading.

  9. Read third time and amended.

  10. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  11. Read second time and amended. Ordered to second reading.

  12. From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 15. Noes 0.) (August 27).

  13. August 19 set for first hearing. Placed on APPR. suspense file.

  14. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  15. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 5. Noes 0.) (July 14). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  16. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on PUB. S.

  17. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on PUB. S.

  18. From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on PUB. S. (Ayes 9. Noes 0.) (June 23).

  19. Referred to Coms. on P. & C.P. and PUB. S.

  20. In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.

  21. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 39. Noes 0. Page 1301.) Ordered to the Assembly.

  22. Read second time and amended. Ordered to third reading.

  23. From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 7. Noes 0. Page 1148.) (May 28).

  24. Set for hearing May 28.

  25. April 27 hearing: Placed on APPR. suspense file.

  26. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  27. Set for hearing April 27.

  28. April 20 hearing postponed by committee.

  29. Set for hearing April 20.

  30. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 1. Page 404.) (March 24). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  31. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on PUB. S.

  32. Set for hearing March 24.

  33. Referred to Com. on PUB. S.

  34. From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 12.

  35. Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.

Sponsors

  • Anderson · Cosponsor
  • Cannella · Cosponsor
  • Chiu · Cosponsor
  • Gatto · Cosponsor
  • Gordon · Cosponsor
  • Hertzberg · Cosponsor
  • Hill · Cosponsor
  • Leno · Primary
  • Maienschein · Cosponsor
  • Mike McGuire · Cosponsor
  • Nielsen · Cosponsor
  • Obernolte · Cosponsor
  • Quirk · Cosponsor
  • Roth · Cosponsor
  • Ting · Cosponsor
  • Weber · Cosponsor
  • Beth Gaines · Cosponsor

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 16 co-sponsors · 105 not signed on · 4 voted No

Sponsors (1)

  • Leno

Co-sponsors (16)

  • Anderson
  • Cannella
  • Chiu
  • Gatto
  • Gordon
  • Hertzberg
  • Hill
  • Maienschein
  • McGuire, Mike Democratic
  • Nielsen
  • Obernolte
  • Quirk
  • Roth
  • Ting
  • Weber
  • Beth Gaines

Not signed on (105)

105 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 105 →

"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

Passed 34 Yea · 4 Nay · 2 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 32302
Democratic 2100
Total 34402
% of votes cast 85%10%0%5%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Anderson — Yea
Block — Yea
Hertzberg — Yea
Monning — Yea
Pan — Yea
Vidak — Nay
Fuller — Yea
Allen — Yea
Cannella — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
De León — Yea
Runner — Not Voting
Galgiani — Nay
Glazer — Yea
Hall — Not Voting
Hancock — Yea
Bates — Yea
Beall — Yea
Hernandez — Yea
Hill — Yea
Hueso — Yea
Huff — Yea
Lara — Yea
Leno — Yea
Leyva — Yea
Liu — Yea
Mendoza — Yea
Moorlach — Yea
Morrell — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Pavley — Yea
Roth — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Wolk — Yea
Beth Gaines — Yea
Bill Berryhill — Yea
Mark Stone — Nay
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Yea
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea
Nguyen, Stephanie Democratic Nay

Official roll call →

Passed 57 Yea · 13 Nay · 10 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 531107
Democratic 1102
Republican 3101
Total 5713010
% of votes cast 71%16%0%13%
How each member voted (80)
Member Party Vote
Achadjian — Yea
Alejo — Not Voting
Baker — Nay
Bloom — Yea
Brough — Nay
Brown — Yea
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Mathis — Yea
Weber — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Chávez — Not Voting
Cooper — Nay
Frazier — Nay
Levine — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Hadley — Yea
Chau — Yea
Linder — Nay
Gray — Nay
Chu — Yea
Medina — Nay
Quirk — Yea
Ridley-Thomas — Nay
Rodriguez — Yea
Santiago — Yea
Steinorth — Yea
Ting — Yea
Waldron — Nay
Williams — Nay
Wood — Yea
Gatto — Yea
Burke — Yea
Bonilla — Yea
Harper — Yea
Holden — Yea
Lopez — Yea
Low — Yea
Mayes — Yea
McCarty — Yea
Melendez — Yea
Mullin — Yea
Bigelow — Yea
Campos — Yea
Chang — Yea
Chiu — Yea
Cooley — Yea
Dababneh — Yea
Dodd — Yea
Nazarian — Yea
Obernolte — Yea
Olsen — Yea
Rendon — Yea
Thurmond — Yea
Wagner — Yea
Wilk — Yea
Perea — Nay
Salas — Not Voting
Kim — Not Voting
Daly — Not Voting
O'Donnell — Not Voting
Gomez — Yea
Gordon — Yea
Beth Gaines — Not Voting
Cristina Garcia — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Jim Patterson — Yea
Lorena Gonzalez — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Roger Hernández — Yea
Travis Allen — Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Not Voting
Gipson, Mike A. Democratic Not Voting
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Nay
Dahle, Megan Republican Nay
Gallagher, James Republican Not Voting
Grove, Shannon Republican Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea
Lackey, Tom Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass as amended.

Passed 15 Yea · 0 Nay · 2 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 11002
Democratic 2000
Republican 2000
Total 15002
% of votes cast 88%0%0%12%
How each member voted (17)
Member Party Vote
Rendon — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Gomez — Yea
Bloom — Yea
Chang — Not Voting
Holden — Yea
Bigelow — Yea
Nazarian — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Wagner — Not Voting
Weber — Yea
Wood — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Gallagher, James Republican Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Passed 9 Yea · 0 Nay · 2 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 7002
Democratic 1000
Republican 1000
Total 9002
% of votes cast 82%0%0%18%
How each member voted (11)
Member Party Vote
Baker — Not Voting
Chang — Yea
Cooper — Yea
Gatto — Yea
Gordon — Yea
Chau — Yea
Dababneh — Yea
Low — Yea
Wilk — Not Voting
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Yea

Official roll call →

3rd Reading

Passed 39 Yea · 0 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 36001
Democratic 3000
Total 39001
% of votes cast 98%0%0%3%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Bates — Yea
Hill — Yea
Hueso — Yea
Lara — Yea
Leyva — Yea
Monning — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Roth — Yea
Fuller — Yea
Galgiani — Yea
Hall — Yea
Cannella — Yea
Hernandez — Yea
Hertzberg — Yea
Allen — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
De León — Yea
Runner — Yea
Anderson — Yea
Block — Yea
Leno — Yea
Liu — Yea
Mendoza — Yea
Moorlach — Yea
Morrell — Yea
Pan — Yea
Pavley — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Wolk — Yea
Hancock — Not Voting
Huff — Yea
Beall — Yea
Vidak — Yea
Glazer — Yea
Beth Gaines — Yea
Bill Berryhill — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Yea
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea
Nguyen, Stephanie Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass as amended

Passed 7 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 7000
Total 7000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (7)
Member Party Vote
Bates — Yea
Leyva — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Hill — Yea
Beall — Yea
Lara — Yea
Mendoza — Yea

Official roll call →

Placed on suspense file

Passed 7 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 7000
Total 7000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (7)
Member Party Vote
Beall — Yea
Leyva — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Hill — Yea
Lara — Yea
Mendoza — Yea
Bates — Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

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 178 do?
(1) Existing law provides that a search warrant may only be issued upon probable cause, supported by affidavit, naming or describing the person to be searched or searched for, and particularly describing the property, thing, or things and the place to be searched. Existing law also states the grounds upon which a search warrant may be issued, including, among other grounds, when the property or things to be seized consist of any item or constitute any evidence that tends to show a felony has been committed, or tends to show that a particular person has committed a felony, or when there is a warrant to arrest a person. This bill would prohibit a government entity from compelling the production of or access to electronic communication information or electronic device information, as defined, without a search warrant, wiretap order, order for electronic reader records, or subpoena issued pursuant under specified conditions, except for emergency situations, as defined. The bill would also specify the conditions under which a government entity may access electronic device information by means of physical interaction or electronic communication with the device, such as pursuant to a search warrant, wiretap order, or consent of the owner of the device. The bill would define a number of terms for those purposes, including, among others, "electronic communication information" and "electronic device information," which the bill defines collectively as "electronic information." The bill would require a search warrant for electronic information to describe with particularity the information to be seized and would impose other conditions on the use of the search warrant or wiretap order and the information obtained, including retention, sealing, and disclosure. The bill would require a warrant directed to a service provider to be accompanied by an order requiring the service provider to verify by affidavit the authenticity of electronic information that it produces, as specified. The bill would authorize a service provider to voluntarily disclose, when not otherwise prohibited by state or federal law, electronic communication information or subscriber information, and would require a government entity to destroy information so provided within 90 days, subject to specified exceptions. The bill would, subject to exceptions, require a government entity that executes a search warrant pursuant to these provisions to contemporaneously provide notice, as specified, to the identified target, that informs the recipient that information about the recipient has been compelled or requested, and that states the nature of the government investigation under which the information is sought. The bill would authorize a delay of 90 days, subject to renewal, for providing the notice under specified conditions that constitute an emergency. The bill would require the notice to include a copy of the warrant or statement describing the emergency under which the notice was delayed. The bill would provide that any person in a trial, hearing, or proceeding may move to suppress any electronic information obtained or retained in violation of its provisions, according to specified procedures. The bill would provide that a California or foreign corporation, and its officers, employees, and agents, are not subject to any cause of action for providing records, information, facilities, or assistance in accordance with the terms of a warrant, wiretap order, or other order issued pursuant to these provisions. (2) 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 would exclude evidence obtained or retained in violation of its provisions in a criminal proceeding, it requires a 23 vote of the Legislature.
Who sponsors SB 178?
SB 178 is sponsored by Anderson, Cannella, Chiu, Gatto, Gordon, Hertzberg, Hill, Leno, Maienschein, McGuire, Mike (Democratic), Nielsen, Obernolte, Quirk, Roth, Ting, Weber, and Beth Gaines.
What is the current status of SB 178?
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 09, 2015. Enacted.
Where can I track SB 178?
Track SB 178 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 178

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.

Stay ahead of SB 178

Last checked for changes 2 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →