California 2023-2024 Regular Session Status: Passed Senate 1 D cosponsors

SB 697 — Conspiracy against trade: punishment.

Last action — August 15 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.

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

This bill died with 2023-2024 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Senate” 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This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis.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

Existing law, known as the Cartwright Act, generally regulates trusts, which the act defines as a combination of capital, skill, or acts by 2 or more persons for certain purposes, including to create or carry out restrictions in trade or commerce. If a violator of the act is a corporation, the act punishes the violator by a fine of the greater of an amount not more than $1,000,000 and an amount related to the pecuniary gain from the violation or the pecuniary loss to another by the violation, as prescribed. If a violator of the act is an individual, the act punishes the violator by imprisonment of one, 2, or 3 years in a state prison or county jail, as specified, imprisonment of not more than one year in a county jail, by a fine of not more than the greater of $250,000 and an amount related to the pecuniary gain from the violation or the pecuniary loss to another by the violation, or by both a fine and imprisonment. This bill would, on or after January 1, 2026, increase the fine described above with respect to corporate violators to $100,000,000. The bill would also increase the term of imprisonment in a state prison or county jail described above to not more than 10 years and would increase the fine described above with respect to an individual violator to $1,000,000. By increasing the maximum term an individual violator could serve in a county prison, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. 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, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. August 15 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.

  2. August 7 set for first hearing. Placed on suspense file.

  3. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  4. From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 8. Noes 2.) (July 2).

  5. Re-referred to Com. on JUD. pursuant to Assembly Rule 96.

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

  7. June 28 set for first hearing canceled at the request of author.

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

  9. Referred to Com. on INS.

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

  11. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 32. Noes 2. Page 1328.) Ordered to the Assembly.

  12. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  13. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 6. Noes 1. Page 1180.) (May 18).

  14. Set for hearing May 18.

  15. May 1 hearing: Placed on APPR suspense file.

  16. Set for hearing May 1.

  17. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 4. Noes 0. Page 833.) (April 19). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  18. Set for hearing April 19.

  19. Referred to Com. on L., P.E. & R.

  20. From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 19.

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

Sponsors

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on · 4 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 as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]

Passed 8 Yea · 2 Nay · 2 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 8000
Republican 0201
Unaffiliated 0001
Total 8202
% of votes cast 67%17%0%17%
How each member voted (12)
Member Party Vote
Maienschein — Not Voting
Bauer-Kahan, Rebecca Democratic Yea
Bryan, Isaac G. Democratic Yea
Connolly, Damon Democratic Yea
Haney, Matt Democratic Yea
Kalra, Ash Democratic Yea
McKinnor, Tina Democratic Yea
Pacheco, Blanca Democratic Yea
Reyes, Eloise Gómez Democratic Yea
Dixon, Diane Republican Nay
Patterson, Joe Republican Nay
Sanchez, Kate Republican Not Voting

Official roll call →

3rd Reading

Passed 32 Yea · 2 Nay · 6 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 18004
Unaffiliated 11000
Republican 3202
Total 32206
% of votes cast 80%5%0%15%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Eggman — Yea
Glazer — Yea
Dodd — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Roth — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Newman — Yea
Min — Yea
Wilk — Yea
Allen, Benjamin Democratic Yea
Archuleta, Bob Democratic Yea
Ashby, Angelique V. Democratic Yea
Becker, Josh Democratic Yea
Blakespear, Catherine S. Democratic Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Not Voting
Cortese, Dave Democratic Yea
Durazo, Maria Elena Democratic Yea
Gonzalez, Lena A. Democratic Yea
Hurtado, Melissa Democratic Yea
Laird, John Democratic Yea
Limón, Monique Democratic Yea
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea
Menjivar, Caroline Democratic Yea
Nguyen, Stephanie Democratic Not Voting
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Yea
Rubio, Susan Democratic Not Voting
Smallwood-Cuevas, Lola Democratic Yea
Stern, Henry I. Democratic Not Voting
Umberg, Thomas J. Democratic Yea
Wahab, Aisha Democratic Yea
Wiener, Scott D. Democratic Yea
Alvarado-Gil, Marie Republican Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Not Voting
Grove, Shannon Republican Not Voting
Jones, Brian W. Republican Nay
Niello, Roger W. Republican Nay
Ochoa Bogh, Rosilicie Republican Yea
Seyarto, Kelly Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

public-safety taxation
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 697 do?
Existing law, known as the Cartwright Act, generally regulates trusts, which the act defines as a combination of capital, skill, or acts by 2 or more persons for certain purposes, including to create or carry out restrictions in trade or commerce. If a violator of the act is a corporation, the act punishes the violator by a fine of the greater of an amount not more than $1,000,000 and an amount related to the pecuniary gain from the violation or the pecuniary loss to another by the violation, as prescribed. If a violator of the act is an individual, the act punishes the violator by imprisonment of one, 2, or 3 years in a state prison or county jail, as specified, imprisonment of not more than one year in a county jail, by a fine of not more than the greater of $250,000 and an amount related to the pecuniary gain from the violation or the pecuniary loss to another by the violation, or by both a fine and imprisonment. This bill would, on or after January 1, 2026, increase the fine described above with respect to corporate violators to $100,000,000. The bill would also increase the term of imprisonment in a state prison or county jail described above to not more than 10 years and would increase the fine described above with respect to an individual violator to $1,000,000. By increasing the maximum term an individual violator could serve in a county prison, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. 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, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Who sponsors SB 697?
SB 697 is sponsored by Hurtado, Melissa (Democratic).
What is the current status of SB 697?
This bill died with 2023-2024 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Senate” 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 697?
Track SB 697 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 697

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 697

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →