California 2023-2024 Regular Session Status: Enacted 16 D cosponsors

SB 345 — Health care services: legally protected health care activities.

Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 260, Statutes of 2023.

Track this bill free

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

  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 07, 2023. Enacted.

Signed by Governor Gavin Newsom (Democratic) on September 27, 2023.

Prognosis

Likely to advance 82% · moderate confidence

Where this bill stands today.

Odds of enactment

High

How often bills like it became law.

  • Enacted

    Current position in the legislative process.

  • 19 sponsors

    1 primary, 18 co-sponsors signed on.

  • Single-party support

    Sponsorship is currently within one party (16 D).

  • Cleared a recorded vote

    Passed 10 recorded votes 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.

Summary

(1) Existing law provides for the licensure and regulation of various categories of medical professionals by boards within the Department of Consumer Affairs, including, among others, the Medical Board of California and the Dental Board of California. Existing law makes specified actions by licensed health care providers unprofessional conduct and, in certain cases, a criminal offense. This bill would prohibit a healing arts board, as defined, from denying an application for a license or imposing discipline upon a licensee or health care practitioner on the basis of a civil judgment, criminal conviction, or disciplinary action in another state if that judgment, conviction, or disciplinary action is based solely on the application of another state's law that interferes with a person's right to receive sensitive services, as defined, that would be lawful if provided in this state, regardless of the patient's location. The bill would further provide that the performance, recommendation, or provision of a legally protected health care activity by a licensee or health care practitioner acting within their scope of practice for a patient who resides in a state in which the performance, recommendation, or provision of that legally protected health care activity is illegal, does not, by itself, constitute professional misconduct, upon which discipline or other penalty may be taken. In this connection, the bill would define a "legally protected health care activity" to mean specified acts, including, among others, the exercise and enjoyment, or attempted exercise and enjoyment, by a person of rights related to reproductive health care services or gender-affirming health care services secured by the Constitution or laws of this state or the provision of by a health care service plan contract or a policy, or a certificate of health insurance, that provides for those services. (2) Existing law, the Confidentiality of Medical Information Act, generally prohibits a health care provider, health care service plan, contractor, or corporation from sharing, selling, using for marketing, or otherwise using medical information for a purpose not necessary to provide health care services to the patient. This bill would prohibit a person or business from collecting, using, disclosing, or retaining the personal information of a person who is physically located at, or within a precise geolocation of, a family planning center, as defined, except as necessary to perform the services or provide the goods requested. The bill would prohibit the sale or sharing of this information. The bill would authorize an aggrieved person or entity to institute and prosecute a civil action for a violation of these provisions and specify damages and costs authorized to be recovered. The bill would specify these provisions do not apply to a provider of health care, a health care service plan, or a contractor, as defined. (3) Existing law, the Reproductive Privacy Act, declares as contrary to the public policy of this state a law of another state that authorizes a person to bring a civil action against a person or entity that engages in certain activities relating to obtaining or performing an abortion. Existing law prohibits the state from applying an out-of-state law described above to a case or controversy in state court or enforcing or satisfying a civil judgment under the out-of-state law. This bill would state that California law governs in any action against a person who provides or receives by any means, including telehealth, reproductive health care services or gender-affirming health care services, as specified, if the care was legal in the state in which it was provided at the time of the challenged conduct. The bill would state that interference with the right to reproductive health care services, gender-affirming health care services, or gender-affirming mental health care services, as those terms are defined, is against the public policy of California. The bill would declare as a violation of public policy a public act or record of a foreign jurisdiction that, among other things, authorizes a person to bring a civil action against a person, provider, or other entity in California for, among other acts, seeking or providing reproductive health care services, gender-affirming health care services, or gender-affirmative mental health care services. The bill would declare the intent of the Legislature that nothing in the bill be interpreted to undermine or decrease any existing protections under California law. The bill would authorize a person to institute a civil action against a person who engages in abusive litigation, as defined, that infringes on or interferes with a legally protected health care activity, among other things. The bill would specify damages and costs authorized to be recovered and would specify circumstances under which a court may exercise jurisdiction over a person in such a civil action. The bill would authorize an aggrieved person, provider, or other entity, as defined, to move to modify or quash a subpoena issued in connection with abusive litigation. The bill would specify the laws of California govern in a case or controversy heard in California related to reproductive health care services, gender-affirming health care services, or gender-affirming mental health care services, except as required by federal law. (4) Existing law permits a judgment creditor to apply for the entry of a judgment based on a sister state judgment by filing an application with a superior court and requires the court clerk to enter a judgment based on the application. Existing law also requires courts to grant a stay enforcement of such a judgment under specified circumstances. This bill would additionally require a court to grant a stay of enforcement of a sister state judgment if a money judgment or lien on real property was obtained for the exercise of a right guaranteed by the United States Constitution, a right guaranteed by the California Constitution, or against a person or entity for aiding and abetting the exercise of those rights, as specified. (5) Existing law prohibits an abortion from being performed upon an unemancipated minor unless she first has given her written consent to the abortion and also has obtained the written consent of one of her parents or legal guardian. Existing law provides specified judicial procedures to be followed if one or both of the unemancipated pregnant minor's or her guardian refuse to consent or if the minor elects not to seek their consent. This bill would repeal these provisions. (6) Existing law defines murder as the unlawful killing of a human being, or a fetus, with malice aforethought. Existing law creates an exemption for a person who commits an act that results in the death of a fetus under specific circumstances, including if the act is solicited, aided, abetted, or consented to by the person pregnant with the fetus. This bill would expand that exemption to include a person pregnant with a fetus who committed the act that resulted in the death of the fetus. (7) Existing law prohibits a state or local law enforcement agency or officer from knowingly arresting or knowingly participating in the arrest of any person for performing, supporting, or aiding in the performance of an abortion or for obtaining an abortion, if the abortion is lawful in this state. Existing law prohibits a state or local public agency from cooperating with or providing information to an individual or agency from another state or a federal law enforcement agency, as specified, regarding a lawful abortion. This bill would additionally prohibit a state or local government employee or a person acting on behalf of the local or state government, among others, from providing information or expending resources in furtherance of an investigation that seeks to impose civil or criminal liability or professional sanctions on an individual for a legally protected health care activity that occurred in this state or that would be legal if it occurred in this state. The bill would require any out-of-state subpoena, warrant, wiretap order, pen register trap and trace order, or other legal process to include an affidavit or declaration under penalty of perjury that the discovery request is not in connection with an out-of-state proceeding relating to a legally protected health care activity, except as specified. By requiring an individual seeking to discovery under these provisions to declare certain conditions are present under penalty of perjury, this bill would expand the crime of perjury and impose a state-mandated local program. (8) Existing law authorizes a magistrate to issue a warrant, upon application by a bail bondsman, as described, for an individual fleeing bail in another state and found in this state upon a finding of probable cause for believing that the person is a fugitive. Existing law makes it a misdemeanor to take a person who is a fugitive admitted to bail in another state into custody, except pursuant to a magistrate's order. This bill would prohibit a magistrate from issuing a warrant for the arrest of an individual whose alleged offense or conviction is for the violation of the laws of another state that authorize a criminal penalty to an individual performing, receiving, supporting, or aiding in the performance or receipt of sexual or reproductive health care, including, but not limited to, an abortion, contraception, or gender-affirming care if the sexual or reproductive health care is lawful under the laws of this state, regardless of the recipient's location. The bill would make a bail bondsman who takes such an individual into custody without a warrant guilty of an infraction punishable by a fine of $5,000 and ineligible for and subject to forfeiture of specified licenses. The bill would create a civil cause of action for an individual taken into custody in violation of this provision. By creating a new crime, this bill would create a state-mandated local program. (9) Existing law, the Bail Fugitive Recovery Persons Act, prohibits a person, other than a certified law enforcement officer, from apprehending, detaining, or arresting a bail fugitive unless the person is a licensed bail fugitive recovery agent, or both a bail licensee and private investigator who are also bail fugitive recovery agents. Existing law makes a violation of the Bail Fugitive Recovery Persons Act a misdemeanor. This bill would prohibit a person authorized under the act from apprehending, detaining, or arresting a bail fugitive who has been admitted to bail in another state and whose alleged offense or conviction is for the violation of a law of another state that authorizes a criminal penalty to an individual performing, receiving, supporting, or aiding in the performance or receipt of sexual or reproductive health care, including, but not limited to, abortion, contraception, or gender-affirming care, if the sexual or reproductive health care is lawful under the laws of this state, regardless of the recipient's location. The bill would make a violation of this provision an infraction punishable by a fine of $5,000 and make the authorized individual ineligible for and subject to forfeiture of specified licenses. The bill would create a civil cause of action for an individual taken into custody in violation of this provision. By expanding the application of a crime, this bill would create a state-mandated local program. (10) Existing law establishes a process by which a material witness in this state may be ordered to attend and testify in a pending prosecution or grand jury in another state. This bill would prohibit a judge from ordering a witness to appear pursuant to these provisions if the criminal prosecution is based on the laws of another state that authorizes a criminal penalty to an individual performing, receiving, supporting, or aiding in the performance or receipt of sexual or reproductive health care, including, but not limited to, an abortion, contraception, or gender-affirming care if the sexual or reproductive health care is lawful under the laws of this state. (11) Existing law provides for the California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) program, under which each county provides cash assistance and other benefits to qualified low-income families and individuals. Existing federal law establishes the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) , known in California as CalFresh, under which supplemental nutrition assistance benefits allocated to the state by the federal government are distributed to eligible individuals by each county. Existing federal regulations disqualify a fleeing felon, as defined, from receiving benefits under the CalFresh program. This bill would require a determination that a person is fleeing to avoid prosecution for purposes of eligibility in the CalWORKs program if a federal, state, or local law enforcement officer in their official capacity presents an outstanding felony arrest warrant containing specified National Crime Information Center Uniform Offense Classification Codes. (12) Existing law refers to "unborn children" and "unborn persons" in various contexts, including, among others, defining low-risk pregnancy conditions for determining the scope of authorization of a certificate to practice nurse-midwifery, defining active labor for health facility licensing provisions, and defining spouse for California State Teachers' Retirement System benefits. This bill would replace "unborn child" and "unborn person" with "fetus" in those provisions. (13) Existing law also refers to "unborn persons" in various contexts, including naming unknown defendants in real property actions, allowing a court to appoint a guardian ad litem to advocate for inadequately represented interests in probate proceedings, allowing a guardian ad litem to give consent on behalf of a beneficiary who lacks legal capacity, and providing an exception for requiring a personal representative to file an account of the distributions of a decedent's estate. This bill would replace "unborn person" with "unborn beneficiary" in those provisions. (14) 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. (15) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 2746.5 of the Business and Professions Code proposed by SB 667 to be operative only if this bill and SB 667 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 260, Statutes of 2023.

  2. Approved by the Governor.

  3. Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 4 p.m.

  4. Assembly amendments concurred in. (Ayes 32. Noes 8. Page 2468.) Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.

  5. In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.

  6. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 62. Noes 15. Page 2964.) Ordered to the Senate.

  7. (Corrected September 6).

  8. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

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

  10. From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 11. Noes 4.) (September 1).

  11. August 23 set for first hearing. Placed on suspense file.

  12. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 1.) (July 11). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

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

  14. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on PUB. S. (Ayes 8. Noes 2.) (July 5). Re-referred to Com. on PUB. S.

  15. Re-referred to Coms. on JUD. and PUB. S. pursuant to Assembly Rule 96.

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

  17. Referred to Coms. on PUB. S. and JUD.

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

  19. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 32. Noes 8. Page 1388.) Ordered to the Assembly.

  20. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

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

  22. From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 5. Noes 2. Page 1166.) (May 18).

  23. Set for hearing May 18.

  24. May 8 hearing: Placed on APPR suspense file.

  25. Set for hearing May 8.

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

  27. From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 8. Noes 2. Page 892.) (April 25).

  28. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on JUD. (Ayes 4. Noes 0. Page 802.) (April 18). Re-referred to Com. on JUD.

  29. Set for hearing April 25 in JUD. pending receipt.

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

  31. Set for hearing April 18.

  32. Re-referred to Coms. on PUB S. and JUD.

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

  34. Referred to Com. on RLS.

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

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

Sponsors

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 18 co-sponsors · 103 not signed on · 18 voted No

Sponsors (1)

  • Skinner

Co-sponsors (18)

Not signed on (103)

103 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 103 →

"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

Unfinished Business SB345 Skinner et al. Concurrence

Passed 32 Yea · 8 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 10100
Democratic 21100
Republican 1600
Total 32800
% of votes cast 80%20%0%0%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Roth — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Newman — Yea
Min — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Glazer — Yea
Dodd — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Wilk — Nay
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 Yea
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 Nay
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Yea
Rubio, Susan Democratic Yea
Smallwood-Cuevas, Lola Democratic Yea
Stern, Henry I. Democratic Yea
Umberg, Thomas J. Democratic Yea
Wahab, Aisha Democratic Yea
Wiener, Scott D. Democratic Yea
Alvarado-Gil, Marie Republican Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Nay
Grove, Shannon Republican Nay
Jones, Brian W. Republican Nay
Niello, Roger W. Republican Nay
Ochoa Bogh, Rosilicie Republican Nay
Seyarto, Kelly Republican Nay

Official roll call →

SB 345 Skinner Senate Third Reading By Wilson

Passed 62 Yea · 15 Nay · 3 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 46001
Unaffiliated 15500
Republican 11002
Total 621503
% of votes cast 78%19%0%4%
How each member voted (80)
Member Party Vote
Holden — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Rodriguez — Yea
Villapudua — Yea
Ting — Yea
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
McCarty — Yea
Rendon — Yea
Friedman — Yea
Low — Yea
Wood — Yea
Santiago — Yea
Essayli — Nay
Waldron — Nay
Mathis — Nay
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Jim Patterson — Nay
Luz Rivas — Yea
Vince Fong — Nay
Wendy Carrillo — Yea
Addis, Dawn Democratic Yea
Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. Democratic Yea
Alvarez, David Democratic Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Bains, Jasmeet Democratic Yea
Bauer-Kahan, Rebecca Democratic Yea
Bennett, Steve Democratic Yea
Berman, Marc Democratic Yea
Boerner, Tasha Democratic Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Bryan, Isaac G. Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Carrillo, Juan Democratic Yea
Cervantes, Sabrina Democratic Yea
Connolly, Damon Democratic Yea
Fong, Mike Democratic Yea
Gabriel, Jesse Democratic Yea
Gipson, Mike A. Democratic Yea
Grayson, Timothy S. Democratic Not Voting
Haney, Matt Democratic Yea
Hart, Gregg Democratic Yea
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Yea
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Yea
Kalra, Ash Democratic Yea
Lee, Alex Democratic Yea
Lowenthal, Josh Democratic Yea
McKinnor, Tina Democratic Yea
Muratsuchi, Al Democratic Yea
Nguyen, Stephanie Democratic Yea
Ortega, Liz Democratic Yea
Pacheco, Blanca Democratic Yea
Papan, Diane Democratic Yea
Pellerin, Gail Democratic Yea
Petrie-Norris, Cottie Democratic Yea
Quirk-Silva, Sharon Democratic Yea
Ramos, James C. Democratic Yea
Reyes, Eloise Gómez Democratic Yea
Rivas, Robert Democratic Yea
Rubio, Blanca E. Democratic Yea
Schiavo, Pilar Democratic Yea
Soria, Esmeralda Democratic Yea
Valencia, Avelino Democratic Yea
Ward, Christopher M. Democratic Yea
Weber Pierson, M.D., Akilah Democratic Yea
Wicks, Buffy Democratic Yea
Wilson, Lori D. Democratic Yea
Zbur, Rick Chavez Democratic Yea
Alanis, Juan Republican Not Voting
Chen, Phillip Republican Nay
Dahle, Megan Republican Nay
Davies, Laurie Republican Not Voting
Dixon, Diane Republican Nay
Flora, Heath Republican Nay
Gallagher, James Republican Nay
Hoover, Josh Republican Nay
Lackey, Tom Republican Nay
Patterson, Joe Republican Nay
Sanchez, Kate Republican Nay
Ta, Tri Republican Nay
Wallis, Greg Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass as amended.

Passed 11 Yea · 4 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 9001
Unaffiliated 2100
Republican 0300
Total 11401
% of votes cast 69%25%0%6%
How each member voted (16)
Member Party Vote
Holden — Yea
Mathis — Nay
Wendy Carrillo — Yea
Bryan, Isaac G. Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Fong, Mike Democratic Yea
Hart, Gregg Democratic Yea
Lowenthal, Josh Democratic Yea
Papan, Diane Democratic Yea
Pellerin, Gail Democratic Yea
Soria, Esmeralda Democratic Not Voting
Weber Pierson, M.D., Akilah Democratic Yea
Wilson, Lori D. Democratic Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Nay
Dixon, Diane Republican Nay
Sanchez, Kate Republican Nay

Official roll call →

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

Passed 6 Yea · 1 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 4000
Unaffiliated 2000
Republican 0101
Total 6101
% of votes cast 75%13%0%13%
How each member voted (8)
Member Party Vote
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
Santiago — Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Bryan, Isaac G. Democratic Yea
Ortega, Liz Democratic Yea
Zbur, Rick Chavez Democratic Yea
Alanis, Juan Republican Not Voting
Lackey, Tom Republican Nay

Official roll call →

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

Passed 8 Yea · 2 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 7000
Unaffiliated 1001
Republican 0200
Total 8201
% of votes cast 73%18%0%9%
How each member voted (11)
Member Party Vote
Maienschein — Yea
Essayli — Not Voting
Connolly, Damon Democratic Yea
Haney, Matt Democratic Yea
Kalra, Ash Democratic Yea
McKinnor, Tina Democratic Yea
Pacheco, Blanca Democratic Yea
Papan, Diane Democratic Yea
Reyes, Eloise Gómez Democratic Yea
Dixon, Diane Republican Nay
Sanchez, Kate Republican Nay

Official roll call →

3rd Reading SB345 Skinner et al.

Passed 32 Yea · 8 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 10100
Democratic 21100
Republican 1600
Total 32800
% of votes cast 80%20%0%0%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Roth — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Newman — Yea
Min — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Glazer — Yea
Dodd — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Wilk — Nay
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 Yea
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 Nay
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Yea
Rubio, Susan Democratic Yea
Smallwood-Cuevas, Lola Democratic Yea
Stern, Henry I. Democratic Yea
Umberg, Thomas J. Democratic Yea
Wahab, Aisha Democratic Yea
Wiener, Scott D. Democratic Yea
Alvarado-Gil, Marie Republican Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Nay
Grove, Shannon Republican Nay
Jones, Brian W. Republican Nay
Niello, Roger W. Republican Nay
Ochoa Bogh, Rosilicie Republican Nay
Seyarto, Kelly Republican Nay

Official roll call →

Do pass as amended, but first amend, and re-refer to the Committee on [Appropriations]

Passed 8 Yea · 2 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 1100
Democratic 7001
Republican 0100
Total 8201
% of votes cast 73%18%0%9%
How each member voted (11)
Member Party Vote
Min — Yea
Wilk — Nay
Allen, Benjamin Democratic Yea
Ashby, Angelique V. Democratic Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Yea
Durazo, Maria Elena Democratic Yea
Laird, John Democratic Yea
Stern, Henry I. Democratic Not Voting
Umberg, Thomas J. Democratic Yea
Wiener, Scott D. Democratic Yea
Niello, Roger W. Republican Nay

Official roll call →

Subjects

civil-rights healthcare health-insurance
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 345 do?
(1) Existing law provides for the licensure and regulation of various categories of medical professionals by boards within the Department of Consumer Affairs, including, among others, the Medical Board of California and the Dental Board of California. Existing law makes specified actions by licensed health care providers unprofessional conduct and, in certain cases, a criminal offense. This bill would prohibit a healing arts board, as defined, from denying an application for a license or imposing discipline upon a licensee or health care practitioner on the basis of a civil judgment, criminal conviction, or disciplinary action in another state if that judgment, conviction, or disciplinary action is based solely on the application of another state's law that interferes with a person's right to receive sensitive services, as defined, that would be lawful if provided in this state, regardless of the patient's location. The bill would further provide that the performance, recommendation, or provision of a legally protected health care activity by a licensee or health care practitioner acting within their scope of practice for a patient who resides in a state in which the performance, recommendation, or provision of that legally protected health care activity is illegal, does not, by itself, constitute professional misconduct, upon which discipline or other penalty may be taken. In this connection, the bill would define a "legally protected health care activity" to mean specified acts, including, among others, the exercise and enjoyment, or attempted exercise and enjoyment, by a person of rights related to reproductive health care services or gender-affirming health care services secured by the Constitution or laws of this state or the provision of by a health care service plan contract or a policy, or a certificate of health insurance, that provides for those services. (2) Existing law, the Confidentiality of Medical Information Act, generally prohibits a health care provider, health care service plan, contractor, or corporation from sharing, selling, using for marketing, or otherwise using medical information for a purpose not necessary to provide health care services to the patient. This bill would prohibit a person or business from collecting, using, disclosing, or retaining the personal information of a person who is physically located at, or within a precise geolocation of, a family planning center, as defined, except as necessary to perform the services or provide the goods requested. The bill would prohibit the sale or sharing of this information. The bill would authorize an aggrieved person or entity to institute and prosecute a civil action for a violation of these provisions and specify damages and costs authorized to be recovered. The bill would specify these provisions do not apply to a provider of health care, a health care service plan, or a contractor, as defined. (3) Existing law, the Reproductive Privacy Act, declares as contrary to the public policy of this state a law of another state that authorizes a person to bring a civil action against a person or entity that engages in certain activities relating to obtaining or performing an abortion. Existing law prohibits the state from applying an out-of-state law described above to a case or controversy in state court or enforcing or satisfying a civil judgment under the out-of-state law. This bill would state that California law governs in any action against a person who provides or receives by any means, including telehealth, reproductive health care services or gender-affirming health care services, as specified, if the care was legal in the state in which it was provided at the time of the challenged conduct. The bill would state that interference with the right to reproductive health care services, gender-affirming health care services, or gender-affirming mental health care services, as those terms are defined, is against the public policy of California. The bill would declare as a violation of public policy a public act or record of a foreign jurisdiction that, among other things, authorizes a person to bring a civil action against a person, provider, or other entity in California for, among other acts, seeking or providing reproductive health care services, gender-affirming health care services, or gender-affirmative mental health care services. The bill would declare the intent of the Legislature that nothing in the bill be interpreted to undermine or decrease any existing protections under California law. The bill would authorize a person to institute a civil action against a person who engages in abusive litigation, as defined, that infringes on or interferes with a legally protected health care activity, among other things. The bill would specify damages and costs authorized to be recovered and would specify circumstances under which a court may exercise jurisdiction over a person in such a civil action. The bill would authorize an aggrieved person, provider, or other entity, as defined, to move to modify or quash a subpoena issued in connection with abusive litigation. The bill would specify the laws of California govern in a case or controversy heard in California related to reproductive health care services, gender-affirming health care services, or gender-affirming mental health care services, except as required by federal law. (4) Existing law permits a judgment creditor to apply for the entry of a judgment based on a sister state judgment by filing an application with a superior court and requires the court clerk to enter a judgment based on the application. Existing law also requires courts to grant a stay enforcement of such a judgment under specified circumstances. This bill would additionally require a court to grant a stay of enforcement of a sister state judgment if a money judgment or lien on real property was obtained for the exercise of a right guaranteed by the United States Constitution, a right guaranteed by the California Constitution, or against a person or entity for aiding and abetting the exercise of those rights, as specified. (5) Existing law prohibits an abortion from being performed upon an unemancipated minor unless she first has given her written consent to the abortion and also has obtained the written consent of one of her parents or legal guardian. Existing law provides specified judicial procedures to be followed if one or both of the unemancipated pregnant minor's or her guardian refuse to consent or if the minor elects not to seek their consent. This bill would repeal these provisions. (6) Existing law defines murder as the unlawful killing of a human being, or a fetus, with malice aforethought. Existing law creates an exemption for a person who commits an act that results in the death of a fetus under specific circumstances, including if the act is solicited, aided, abetted, or consented to by the person pregnant with the fetus. This bill would expand that exemption to include a person pregnant with a fetus who committed the act that resulted in the death of the fetus. (7) Existing law prohibits a state or local law enforcement agency or officer from knowingly arresting or knowingly participating in the arrest of any person for performing, supporting, or aiding in the performance of an abortion or for obtaining an abortion, if the abortion is lawful in this state. Existing law prohibits a state or local public agency from cooperating with or providing information to an individual or agency from another state or a federal law enforcement agency, as specified, regarding a lawful abortion. This bill would additionally prohibit a state or local government employee or a person acting on behalf of the local or state government, among others, from providing information or expending resources in furtherance of an investigation that seeks to impose civil or criminal liability or professional sanctions on an individual for a legally protected health care activity that occurred in this state or that would be legal if it occurred in this state. The bill would require any out-of-state subpoena, warrant, wiretap order, pen register trap and trace order, or other legal process to include an affidavit or declaration under penalty of perjury that the discovery request is not in connection with an out-of-state proceeding relating to a legally protected health care activity, except as specified. By requiring an individual seeking to discovery under these provisions to declare certain conditions are present under penalty of perjury, this bill would expand the crime of perjury and impose a state-mandated local program. (8) Existing law authorizes a magistrate to issue a warrant, upon application by a bail bondsman, as described, for an individual fleeing bail in another state and found in this state upon a finding of probable cause for believing that the person is a fugitive. Existing law makes it a misdemeanor to take a person who is a fugitive admitted to bail in another state into custody, except pursuant to a magistrate's order. This bill would prohibit a magistrate from issuing a warrant for the arrest of an individual whose alleged offense or conviction is for the violation of the laws of another state that authorize a criminal penalty to an individual performing, receiving, supporting, or aiding in the performance or receipt of sexual or reproductive health care, including, but not limited to, an abortion, contraception, or gender-affirming care if the sexual or reproductive health care is lawful under the laws of this state, regardless of the recipient's location. The bill would make a bail bondsman who takes such an individual into custody without a warrant guilty of an infraction punishable by a fine of $5,000 and ineligible for and subject to forfeiture of specified licenses. The bill would create a civil cause of action for an individual taken into custody in violation of this provision. By creating a new crime, this bill would create a state-mandated local program. (9) Existing law, the Bail Fugitive Recovery Persons Act, prohibits a person, other than a certified law enforcement officer, from apprehending, detaining, or arresting a bail fugitive unless the person is a licensed bail fugitive recovery agent, or both a bail licensee and private investigator who are also bail fugitive recovery agents. Existing law makes a violation of the Bail Fugitive Recovery Persons Act a misdemeanor. This bill would prohibit a person authorized under the act from apprehending, detaining, or arresting a bail fugitive who has been admitted to bail in another state and whose alleged offense or conviction is for the violation of a law of another state that authorizes a criminal penalty to an individual performing, receiving, supporting, or aiding in the performance or receipt of sexual or reproductive health care, including, but not limited to, abortion, contraception, or gender-affirming care, if the sexual or reproductive health care is lawful under the laws of this state, regardless of the recipient's location. The bill would make a violation of this provision an infraction punishable by a fine of $5,000 and make the authorized individual ineligible for and subject to forfeiture of specified licenses. The bill would create a civil cause of action for an individual taken into custody in violation of this provision. By expanding the application of a crime, this bill would create a state-mandated local program. (10) Existing law establishes a process by which a material witness in this state may be ordered to attend and testify in a pending prosecution or grand jury in another state. This bill would prohibit a judge from ordering a witness to appear pursuant to these provisions if the criminal prosecution is based on the laws of another state that authorizes a criminal penalty to an individual performing, receiving, supporting, or aiding in the performance or receipt of sexual or reproductive health care, including, but not limited to, an abortion, contraception, or gender-affirming care if the sexual or reproductive health care is lawful under the laws of this state. (11) Existing law provides for the California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) program, under which each county provides cash assistance and other benefits to qualified low-income families and individuals. Existing federal law establishes the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) , known in California as CalFresh, under which supplemental nutrition assistance benefits allocated to the state by the federal government are distributed to eligible individuals by each county. Existing federal regulations disqualify a fleeing felon, as defined, from receiving benefits under the CalFresh program. This bill would require a determination that a person is fleeing to avoid prosecution for purposes of eligibility in the CalWORKs program if a federal, state, or local law enforcement officer in their official capacity presents an outstanding felony arrest warrant containing specified National Crime Information Center Uniform Offense Classification Codes. (12) Existing law refers to "unborn children" and "unborn persons" in various contexts, including, among others, defining low-risk pregnancy conditions for determining the scope of authorization of a certificate to practice nurse-midwifery, defining active labor for health facility licensing provisions, and defining spouse for California State Teachers' Retirement System benefits. This bill would replace "unborn child" and "unborn person" with "fetus" in those provisions. (13) Existing law also refers to "unborn persons" in various contexts, including naming unknown defendants in real property actions, allowing a court to appoint a guardian ad litem to advocate for inadequately represented interests in probate proceedings, allowing a guardian ad litem to give consent on behalf of a beneficiary who lacks legal capacity, and providing an exception for requiring a personal representative to file an account of the distributions of a decedent's estate. This bill would replace "unborn person" with "unborn beneficiary" in those provisions. (14) 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. (15) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 2746.5 of the Business and Professions Code proposed by SB 667 to be operative only if this bill and SB 667 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Who sponsors SB 345?
SB 345 is sponsored by Skinner, Becker, Josh (Democratic), Caballero, Anna M. (Democratic), Cortese, Dave (Democratic), Dodd, McGuire, Mike (Democratic), Menjivar, Caroline (Democratic), Min, Padilla, Stephen C. (Democratic), Stern, Henry I. (Democratic), Wahab, Aisha (Democratic), Wiener, Scott D. (Democratic), Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. (Democratic), Cervantes, Sabrina (Democratic), Connolly, Damon (Democratic), Haney, Matt (Democratic), Kalra, Ash (Democratic), Pellerin, Gail (Democratic), and Schiavo, Pilar (Democratic).
What is the current status of SB 345?
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 07, 2023. Enacted.
Where can I track SB 345?
Track SB 345 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 345

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 345

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →