AB 2103 — Pupil records: court orders: disclosure exceptions.
Last action — In committee: Set, second hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.
No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.
-
✓Introduced
-
2In Committee
-
3Passed Assembly
-
4Passed Senate
-
5To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill died with 2015-2016 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This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis.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 requires information concerning a student to be furnished in compliance with a court order or a lawfully issued subpoena. Existing law requires a school district to make a reasonable effort to notify the parent or legal guardian and the pupil in advance of compliance with a lawfully issued subpoena and, in the case of compliance with a court order, if lawfully possible within the requirements of the order. This bill would, consistent with federal law, instead require an educational agency or institution to make that disclosure but would exempt an educational agency or institution from that requirement if the disclosure is made in compliance with (A) a subpoena issued by a grand jury and the court has ordered that the existence or the contents of the subpoena or the information furnished in response to the subpoena not be disclosed or (B) any other subpoena issued for a law enforcement purpose and the court or other issuing agency has ordered that the existence or the contents of the subpoena or the information furnished in response to the subpoena not be disclosed. To the extent the bill would impose additional duties on county offices of education or charter schools, the bill would impose a state-mandated program. (2) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Bill Text
- Amended 03/18/16 - Amended Assembly Current pdf March 18, 2016
- Introduced 02/17/16 - Introduced pdf February 17, 2016
- AB2103 View text html
Action History
-
In committee: Set, second hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.
-
(pending re-refer to Com. on JUD.)
-
Joint Rule 62(a), file notice suspended. (Page 4389.)
-
Assembly Rule 56 suspended. (Page 4389.)
-
In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.
-
Re-referred to Com. on ED.
-
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on ED. Read second time and amended.
-
Referred to Coms. on ED. and JUD.
-
From printer. May be heard in committee March 19.
-
Read first time. To print.
Sponsors
- Burke · Primary
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on
Sponsors (1)
- Burke
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.
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does AB 2103 do?
- (1) Existing law requires information concerning a student to be furnished in compliance with a court order or a lawfully issued subpoena. Existing law requires a school district to make a reasonable effort to notify the parent or legal guardian and the pupil in advance of compliance with a lawfully issued subpoena and, in the case of compliance with a court order, if lawfully possible within the requirements of the order. This bill would, consistent with federal law, instead require an educational agency or institution to make that disclosure but would exempt an educational agency or institution from that requirement if the disclosure is made in compliance with (A) a subpoena issued by a grand jury and the court has ordered that the existence or the contents of the subpoena or the information furnished in response to the subpoena not be disclosed or (B) any other subpoena issued for a law enforcement purpose and the court or other issuing agency has ordered that the existence or the contents of the subpoena or the information furnished in response to the subpoena not be disclosed. To the extent the bill would impose additional duties on county offices of education or charter schools, the bill would impose a state-mandated program. (2) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
- Who sponsors AB 2103?
- AB 2103 is sponsored by Burke.
- What is the current status of AB 2103?
- This bill died with 2015-2016 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 2103?
- Track AB 2103 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on AB 2103
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 AB 2103
Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →