New California Criminal Laws in 2026
New California laws will fundamentally transform the state's criminal justice system in 2026, marking the most comprehensive reform package seen in decades. Starting January 1, these groundbreaking legislative changes will affect everything from victim rights to law enforcement conduct standards. The sweeping reforms include provisions that revive expired sexual assault claims, protect immigrant patients in healthcare settings, and regulate the use of artificial intelligence in judicial processes. Furthermore, the legislation implements strict new requirements for law enforcement identification and creates unprecedented protections for vulnerable communities. These changes reflect California's ongoing commitment to addressing systemic inequities while balancing public safety concerns with individual rights. For anyone navigating the legal system in California, understanding these new laws will be essential, as they redefine the rules governing criminal proceedings, victim advocacy, and law enforcement accountability throughout the state.
California Expands Victim Rights Through New Laws
California begins 2026 with significant expansion of victim rights through several groundbreaking laws designed to increase protections and access to justice for crime victims. These legislative changes reflect a deliberate shift toward victim-centered approaches in the criminal justice system.
AB 250 revives expired sexual assault claims
Assembly Bill 250, signed by Governor Newsom in October 2025, creates an unprecedented opportunity for adult sexual assault survivors to seek justice despite expired statutes of limitations. The law establishes a two-year window from January 1, 2026, through December 31, 2027, during which previously time-barred sexual assault claims can be filed [1]. This revival window applies specifically to cases where adults were sexually assaulted and private entities or individuals are legally responsible for damages [2].
Notably, the law focuses on institutional accountability by requiring claims to allege that an entity engaged in a "cover-up" of sexual assault. Under the legislation, a "cover-up" involves concealing evidence or using nondisclosure agreements that prevent information about sexual assault from becoming public [2]. Additionally, the law allows revival of related claims including workplace harassment and wrongful termination connected to the assault [1].
In contrast to previous revival windows that focused primarily on child victims, AB 250 specifically addresses adult survivors [3]. However, the law explicitly excludes public entities such as schools and police departments from liability [3].
SB 81 protects immigrant patients from enforcement
Senate Bill 81 significantly strengthens protections for immigrant patients in healthcare settings. The law revises California's Confidentiality of Medical Information Act to classify immigration status and place of birth as protected "medical information" [3]. Consequently, this information receives the same strict privacy protections as other health data [3].
Under the new law, healthcare providers are prohibited from disclosing immigration status for enforcement purposes except in limited circumstances [3]. The legislation also requires healthcare facilities to establish procedures for monitoring visitors and designate non-public areas where patients receive treatment [3].
Specifically, SB 81 prohibits immigration enforcement agents from entering non-public areas of healthcare facilities without a valid judicial warrant or court order [3]. Healthcare staff must immediately notify management or legal counsel of any immigration enforcement request for facility access or patient information [3]. These provisions must be implemented within 45 days of the law's effective date [3].
AB 406 allows crime victims to take leave for court
Assembly Bill 406 expands employment protections for crime victims. Beginning January 1, 2026, employees who are victims of certain crimes, or who have family members who are victims, will be entitled to protected leave to participate in a broader range of court proceedings [3].
The law permits employees to use accrued sick leave to attend court proceedings including post-arrest hearings, plea agreements, sentencing, and post-conviction matters [3]. Previously, these activities were only covered under unpaid leave provisions [4].
AB 406 specifically protects employees who need time off to:
- Meet with law enforcement or prosecutors
- Seek or renew restraining orders
- Access services from domestic violence shelters and rape crisis centers
- Participate in safety planning [3]
The legislation defines a "qualifying act of violence" broadly, covering domestic violence, sexual assault, stalking, and other serious crimes [5]. Employers with 25 or more employees cannot discharge or discriminate against employees who take time off for these purposes [4]. Additionally, employers must provide reasonable accommodations for employee safety, including transfer options, modified schedules, or changed work stations [4].
This comprehensive expansion of victim rights represents a significant advancement in California's approach to supporting crime victims throughout the justice process.
Lawmakers Redefine Law Enforcement Conduct Standards
California's legislature has enacted landmark measures for 2026 that establish new standards for law enforcement conduct and accountability. These reforms address growing concerns about transparency in policing while providing clear guidelines for officer identification and behavior.
SB 627 bans face coverings for officers
Senate Bill 627, known as the "No Secret Police Act," makes California the first state to prohibit law enforcement officers from concealing their faces during operations [4]. Signed by Governor Newsom on September 20, 2025, this groundbreaking legislation takes effect January 1, 2026 [6]. The law primarily targets the practice of officers wearing ski masks, balaclavas, and tactical masks that obscure facial identity.
The legislation arose following controversial immigration enforcement operations where officers wore full facial coverings, raising public concerns about accountability. Under the new law, both local and federal law enforcement personnel must operate with visible faces, though certain exemptions exist [7]. These include SWAT operations, approved undercover assignments, motorcycle helmets, protective eyewear, medical masks, and breathing apparatus for hazardous environments [6].
Agencies must establish clear policies regarding facial coverings by July 1, 2026 [4]. These policies must affirm values of transparency and prohibit masking based on generalized officer safety concerns [6]. Violations constitute misdemeanors, and officers who commit civil rights violations while masked face minimum civil damages of $10,000 [4].
SB 805 mandates visible ID for plainclothes officers
Complementing SB 627, Senate Bill 805 (the "No Vigilantes Act") requires plainclothes officers to display visible identification [7]. Starting January 1, 2026, any law enforcement personnel not in uniform must visibly show identification that includes their agency and either their name or badge number [3].
The law applies broadly to all law enforcement personnel operating in California—including local, state, and federal officers [3]. Those found violating this requirement face misdemeanor charges punishable by up to six months in county jail, a $1,000 fine, or both [3].
Each law enforcement agency must implement and publicly post a written identification policy that includes a statement affirming commitment to transparency, accountability, and public trust [3]. These measures address concerns about potential police impersonation and improve community confidence in legitimate law enforcement activities [7].
SB 303 criminalizes threats of mass violence
Senate Bill 19 (not SB 303 as listed in some sources) establishes new criminal penalties for threats targeting institutions rather than specific individuals [5]. Signed by Governor Newsom on October 11, 2025, the law criminalizes credible threats of mass violence against workplaces, schools, houses of worship, and medical facilities [5].
Prior to this legislation, California law only addressed threats against specific persons, "leaving institutions vulnerable to serious disruption and fear," according to Senator Susan Rubio, who co-sponsored the bill [5]. The new statute covers threats communicated through various means, including images or statements posted online [8].
Importantly, prosecutors need not prove the suspect intended to carry out the threat [5]. Instead, the law requires that the threat "causes a person or persons to reasonably be in sustained fear for their own safety" and must be "unequivocal, unconditional, immediate, and specific" enough to convey "gravity of purpose and an immediate prospect of execution" [5].
Although primarily a public safety measure rather than an employment law, SB 19 provides California employers with additional resources to protect their workplaces and employees from threats of violence [8].
State Strengthens Protections for Immigrant Communities
California lawmakers have enacted robust immigration protections as part of the 2026 justice system overhaul, creating essential safeguards for immigrant communities in educational and healthcare settings. The legislative package directly addresses fears that have impacted student performance and healthcare access across the state.
SB 98 restricts immigration enforcement on campuses
Senate Bill 98 establishes comprehensive notification requirements when immigration enforcement officers are present on educational campuses. The law applies to K-12 schools, community colleges, California State University, University of California, and qualifying Cal Grant institutions. Under this legislation, schools must promptly inform all students, parents, faculty, staff, and campus community members when immigration enforcement is confirmed on campus.
Moreover, SB 98 mandates that by March 1, 2026, all comprehensive school safety plans must include specific procedures for notifying the school community about immigration enforcement presence. This requirement extends to charter schools, which may be denied petition approval if their safety plans lack these notification protocols.
Educational institutions are now implementing these requirements through existing emergency communication systems. Stanford University, for instance, has announced it will utilize its AlertSU email system for such notifications if necessary.
AB 49 limits ICE access to student records
Assembly Bill 49, known as the California Safe Haven Schools Act, establishes stringent limitations on immigration enforcement access to educational facilities and student information. The legislation prohibits school officials from allowing immigration enforcement officers to enter nonpublic areas of school sites without first presenting a valid judicial warrant, subpoena, or court order.
School personnel must henceforth request valid identification from any immigration officer attempting to enter nonpublic areas of campus. Additionally, the bill forbids schools from disclosing student education records, personal information, or information about students' families to immigration enforcement without either parental written consent or a valid court order.
Research indicates these protections address a genuine need—studies show that increased immigration enforcement correlates with a 25.2% higher probability of affected students dropping out, as well as increased chronic absenteeism.
SB 81 bars immigration agents from entering hospitals without warrants
Senate Bill 81 extends similar protections to healthcare settings, prohibiting immigration enforcement access to nonpublic areas of medical facilities without a valid judicial warrant or court order. The legislation designates a patient's immigration status and birthplace as protected medical information, subject to the same privacy protections as other health data.
Healthcare facilities must implement specific requirements within 45 days of the law's September 20, 2025 effective date, including:
- Designating treatment and consultation areas as nonpublic zones
- Establishing procedures for staff to immediately notify management about immigration enforcement requests
- Training staff on proper protocols for handling such requests
- Documenting any denial of access to immigration officials
All these measures aim to ensure healthcare facilities remain accessible to California's estimated 1.8 million undocumented immigrants who might otherwise avoid seeking essential medical care due to deportation fears.
Justice System Sees Major Procedural Reforms
Major procedural overhauls in California's 2026 justice system reforms address long-standing equity concerns through three pivotal pieces of legislation, fundamentally changing how the state handles criminal cases.
AB 256 makes Racial Justice Act retroactive
The Racial Justice Act for All (AB 256) extends crucial protections against racial bias in criminal proceedings to cases concluded before January 1, 2021. The law establishes a phased implementation schedule that gradually expands eligibility:
- Starting January 1, 2024: Individuals currently incarcerated for felony convictions [9]
- Starting January 1, 2025: Those with post-2015 felony convictions who are no longer incarcerated [9]
- Starting January 1, 2026: Anyone with a felony conviction, regardless of when it occurred [9]
This legislation allows defendants to challenge convictions by proving racial bias through four distinct pathways: bias exhibited outside court, discriminatory language used during proceedings, disparate charging practices based on race, or harsher sentencing patterns affecting certain racial groups [9]. Upon proving violations, courts may vacate convictions, order new trials, or mandate resentencing [9].
SB 1106 removes unpaid restitution as barrier to parole
Senate Bill 1106 eliminates a significant obstacle facing formerly incarcerated individuals by prohibiting courts from denying post-conviction relief solely based on unfulfilled restitution orders [10]. The legislation removes previous restrictions that prevented parolees with outstanding restitution from being released to reside in another state [10].
This reform particularly benefits residents of economically disadvantaged areas where paying off such debts presents substantial challenges [11]. Importantly, the law does not eliminate restitution debt obligations but ensures they no longer prevent individuals from accessing record clearance [12].
SB 1209 expands resentencing for veterans
SB 1209 broadens resentencing options for veterans suffering from service-related trauma by removing the requirement that defendants must have been sentenced before January 1, 2015 [13]. The law explicitly acknowledges that military-related trauma—including PTSD, traumatic brain injury, sexual trauma, and substance abuse—should be considered mitigating factors [4].
The legislation clarifies that resentencing relief is available even when service-related trauma wasn't presented during original court proceedings [13]. Courts now have authority to reduce sentences or vacate convictions entirely, substituting lesser included offenses with prosecutor agreement [6].
- Related Articles:
- PC 243.4 – Sexual Assault; Sexual Battery
- What Is ‘Realignment’ in The California Criminal Justice System?
- Am I Being Sexually Harassed at Work?
- How Domestic Violence Impacts Military Personnel and Their Families
California Targets AI and Data Use in Criminal Justice
Technology governance takes center stage in California's justice system reforms with three groundbreaking laws addressing artificial intelligence and data protection.
SB 53 mandates transparency in frontier AI models
The Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act establishes the nation's first comprehensive framework for AI safety. Effective January 1, 2026, this law requires developers of "frontier models"—systems trained using more than 10^26 computational operations—to publish detailed safety frameworks [14]. Large frontier developers with annual revenues exceeding $500 million must disclose protocols for mitigating "catastrophic risks" [15]. The law mandates reporting critical safety incidents within 15 days, or within 24 hours if lives are at immediate risk [15]. Violations can result in civil penalties up to $1 million per incident [16].
SB 446 shortens data breach notification window
Starting January 1, 2026, businesses must notify California residents of data breaches within 30 calendar days of discovery [17]. The law likewise requires companies to inform the Attorney General within 15 days when notifications affect more than 500 residents [17]. Companies may delay notifications to accommodate law enforcement needs or to determine breach scope [17]. This legislation addresses concerns that affected individuals were previously left unaware for months about threats to their data [18].
SB 243 regulates chatbot use to prevent harm
Senate Bill 243 creates first-in-nation protections against AI companion chatbots that could mislead users [3]. Operators must disclose when users interact with AI rather than humans [3]. For minor users, the law mandates break reminders every three hours [3]. Companies must implement protocols preventing suicidal ideation content [19]. Beginning July 2027, operators must annually report crisis service referrals to California's Office of Suicide Prevention [20].
Conclusion
California stands at the threshold of a transformative era as these sweeping justice reforms take effect in 2026. Undoubtedly, the comprehensive legislative package represents the most significant overhaul of the state's criminal justice system in decades. Previously time-barred sexual assault claims will find new pathways to resolution through AB 250, while vulnerable populations—particularly immigrants—receive unprecedented protections in educational and healthcare settings.
The state has additionally established strict accountability measures for law enforcement through facial identification requirements and visible ID mandates. These changes specifically address transparency concerns while maintaining necessary exemptions for officer safety during specialized operations.
Procedural reforms likewise dismantle longstanding barriers within the justice system. The Racial Justice Act's retroactive application tackles systemic bias head-on, whereas veterans suffering from service-related trauma gain expanded resentencing options. Furthermore, the elimination of unpaid restitution as a parole barrier removes significant obstacles for formerly incarcerated individuals seeking rehabilitation.
Perhaps most notably, California emerges as a pioneer in regulating artificial intelligence within judicial processes. The first-in-nation requirements for frontier AI model transparency, accelerated data breach notifications, and chatbot regulations demonstrate the state's commitment to responsible technology governance.
Taken together, these laws reflect California's evolving approach to justice—one that balances public safety concerns with individual rights protection. The reforms acknowledge historical inequities while establishing forward-looking frameworks for accountability. Though implementation challenges certainly await, these groundbreaking changes mark a decisive shift toward a more equitable criminal justice system for all Californians.
References
[1] – https://a04.asmdc.org/press-releases/20251013-assembly-majority-leader-aguiar-currys-ab-250-signed-governor-expanding
[2] – https://www.ecjlaw.com/ecj-blog/california-recently-passes-law-to-revive-certain-sexual-assault-claims-against-private-entities-including-employers-by-catherine-a-veeneman
[3] – https://www.skadden.com/insights/publications/2025/10/new-california-companion-chatbot-law
[4] – https://trackbill.com/s3/bills/CA/2021/SB/1209/analyzes/assembly-floor-analysis.pdf
[5] – https://ogletree.com/insights-resources/blog-posts/california-enacts-law-strengthening-protections-against-threats-to-the-workplace/
[6] – https://legiscan.com/CA/text/SB1209/id/2574504
[7] – https://www.cbsnews.com/losangeles/news/california-legislature-bill-law-enforcement-face-coverings/
[8] – https://www.employmentlawworldview.com/californias-october-state-law-updates-what-employers-need-to-know/
[9] – https://www2.ospd.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/AB-256-Racial-Justice-Act-retroactivity_Accessible.pdf
[10] – https://legiscan.com/CA/text/SB1106/id/2589731
[11] – https://iecriminaldefense.com/sb-1106-facilitating-post-conviction-relief-and-parole-by-removing-unpaid-restitution-barriers/
[12] – http://ebclc.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/SB-1106-Implementation-Fact-Sheet.pdf
[13] – https://spsf.senate.ca.gov/sites/spsf.senate.ca.gov/files/sb_1209_analysis.pdf
[14] – https://www.skadden.com/insights/publications/2025/10/landmark-california-ai-safety-legislation
[15] – https://www.lw.com/en/insights/california-assumes-role-as-lead-us-regulator-of-ai
[16] – https://www.activefence.com/blog/california-ai-laws-sb243-sb53
[17] – https://legiscan.com/CA/text/SB446/id/3266810
[18] – https://www.pillsburylaw.com/en/news-and-insights/california-data-breach-notification-requirements.html
[19] – https://legiscan.com/CA/text/SB243/id/3269137
[20] – https://epic.org/california-tech-legislation-roundup-numerous-privacy-and-ai-laws-enacted-and-six-vetoed/
Need Criminal Defense in Los Angeles?
If you are interested in learning more or starting the application process for a Certificate of Rehabilitation, contact our experienced Los Angeles criminal defense attorneys today. Our experienced and assiduous attorneys will be sure to fight until the end to achieve the desired results.
Need a Criminal Defense Attorney? CALL NOW: 213-932-8922
Yuliya Kelmansky is an Expert Criminal Defense Attorney who has over 10 years of practice defending a variety of criminal cases.
