CA AB 1136
vetoedEmployment: immigration and work authorization.
California · 2025-2026 Regular Session · lower
Quick answers
Did CA AB 1136 pass?
No. CA AB 1136 passed the legislature but was vetoed on 2026-01-22. Latest recorded action (2026-01-22): Consideration of Governor's veto stricken from file.
What is CA AB 1136 about?
Existing law, the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, prohibits various forms of employment and housing discrimination, including various types of discrimination because of national origin. Existing law empowers the Civil Rights Department to investigate and prosecute complaints alleging unlawful practices. Existing labor law also prohibits an employer or other person or entity from engaging in, or to directing another person or entity to engage in, unfair immigration-related practices against a person for exercising specified rights. Existing law defines unfair immigration-related practices for these purposes. Existing law additionally makes it unlawful for an employer to request more or different immigration documents than are required under federal law, to refuse to honor documents tendered that reasonably appear to be genuine, and to take other related actions concerning employee work authorization documents. Existing law authorizes an applicant for employment or an employee who is subject to an unlawful act that is prohibited by these provisions, or a representative of that applicant for employment or employee, to file a complaint with the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement. Existing law establishes specified civil penalties for a violation of these provisions. This bill would require each employee, upon request, to be released by their employer for up to 5 unpaid working days within a 12-month period in order to attend appointments, interviews, adjudications, legal proceedings, detainment, or any other meeting at which the employee's presence is required concerning the employee's immigration status, work authorization, visa status, or any other immigration-related matter, as specified. The bill would also require a postintroductory employee, as defined, whose employment has been terminated due to an inability to provide documentation of proper work authorization, to be immediately reinstated to their former classification without loss in seniority, subject to producing proper work authorization, except as provided. The bill would also require an employer, if the employee demonstrates a need for additional time, to rehire the employee into the next available opening in the employee's former classification, as a new hire without retaining seniority, subject to the employee providing proper work authorization and meeting certain other conditions. This bill would require an employer that is notified that an employee has been detained or incarcerated as a result of pending immigration or deportation proceedings, to place the employee on an unpaid leave of absence for a period pending the employee's release from detainment or incarceration and not to exceed 12 months. If the employee is released and provides appropriate work authorization documentation within the period of the authorized unpaid leave of absence, the bill would require the employer to return the employee to their former job classification without loss of seniority, except as specified. This bill would apply the above requirements to a public or private employer, but would exempt a public or private employer with 25 or fewer employees. The bill would prohibit each public or private employer from disciplining, discharging, or discriminating against an employee because of national origin or immigration status, or solely because the employee is subject to immigration or deportation proceedings, except as required to comply with the law. The bill would prohibit an employee subject to immigration or deportation proceedings from being discharged solely because of those proceedings, so long as the employee is authorized to work in the United States. This bill would provide that its provisions do not invalidate a collective bargaining agreement or a memorandum of understanding that contains a provision addressing rehire or reinstatement rights or leave rights regarding employees who are subject to immigration proceedings, nor does it supersede the seniority provisions of a collective bargaining agreement or a memorandum of understanding. The bill would require the Labor Commissioner to enforce the bill's provisions. This bill would make these provisions inoperative on July 1, 2029, and would repeal them on January 1, 2030.
Who sponsors CA AB 1136?
Ortega is the primary sponsor of CA AB 1136, joined by 5 cosponsors.
Description
Existing law, the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, prohibits various forms of employment and housing discrimination, including various types of discrimination because of national origin. Existing law empowers the Civil Rights Department to investigate and prosecute complaints alleging unlawful practices. Existing labor law also prohibits an employer or other person or entity from engaging in, or to directing another person or entity to engage in, unfair immigration-related practices against a person for exercising specified rights. Existing law defines unfair immigration-related practices for these purposes. Existing law additionally makes it unlawful for an employer to request more or different immigration documents than are required under federal law, to refuse to honor documents tendered that reasonably appear to be genuine, and to take other related actions concerning employee work authorization documents. Existing law authorizes an applicant for employment or an employee who is subject to an unlawful act that is prohibited by these provisions, or a representative of that applicant for employment or employee, to file a complaint with the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement. Existing law establishes specified civil penalties for a violation of these provisions. This bill would require each employee, upon request, to be released by their employer for up to 5 unpaid working days within a 12-month period in order to attend appointments, interviews, adjudications, legal proceedings, detainment, or any other meeting at which the employee's presence is required concerning the employee's immigration status, work authorization, visa status, or any other immigration-related matter, as specified. The bill would also require a postintroductory employee, as defined, whose employment has been terminated due to an inability to provide documentation of proper work authorization, to be immediately reinstated to their former classification without loss in seniority, subject to producing proper work authorization, except as provided. The bill would also require an employer, if the employee demonstrates a need for additional time, to rehire the employee into the next available opening in the employee's former classification, as a new hire without retaining seniority, subject to the employee providing proper work authorization and meeting certain other conditions. This bill would require an employer that is notified that an employee has been detained or incarcerated as a result of pending immigration or deportation proceedings, to place the employee on an unpaid leave of absence for a period pending the employee's release from detainment or incarceration and not to exceed 12 months. If the employee is released and provides appropriate work authorization documentation within the period of the authorized unpaid leave of absence, the bill would require the employer to return the employee to their former job classification without loss of seniority, except as specified. This bill would apply the above requirements to a public or private employer, but would exempt a public or private employer with 25 or fewer employees. The bill would prohibit each public or private employer from disciplining, discharging, or discriminating against an employee because of national origin or immigration status, or solely because the employee is subject to immigration or deportation proceedings, except as required to comply with the law. The bill would prohibit an employee subject to immigration or deportation proceedings from being discharged solely because of those proceedings, so long as the employee is authorized to work in the United States. This bill would provide that its provisions do not invalidate a collective bargaining agreement or a memorandum of understanding that contains a provision addressing rehire or reinstatement rights or leave rights regarding employees who are subject to immigration proceedings, nor does it supersede the seniority provisions of a collective bargaining agreement or a memorandum of understanding. The bill would require the Labor Commissioner to enforce the bill's provisions. This bill would make these provisions inoperative on July 1, 2029, and would repeal them on January 1, 2030.
- Introduced
- 2025-06-23
- Latest action
- 2026-01-22 — Consideration of Governor's veto stricken from file.
- Bill type
- bill
- Last updated
- —
Subjects
Sponsors
- Ortegaauthor
- Gipsonprincipal coauthor
- Durazoprincipal coauthor
- Beckercoauthor
- Caballerocoauthor
- Gonzalezcoauthor
Committees
Not provided by source.
Action timeline
2025-02-20
Read first time. To print.
reading-1
2025-02-21
From printer. May be heard in committee March 23.
2025-03-10
Referred to Com. on L. & E.
referral-committee
2025-04-03
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 0.) (April 2). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee
2025-04-23
In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to suspense file.
referral-committee
2025-05-23
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 12. Noes 0.) (May 23).
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable
2025-05-27
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
reading-1,reading-2,reading-3
2025-06-03
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 68. Noes 2. Page 1990.)
passage,reading-1,reading-3
2025-06-04
In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.
reading-1,referral-committee
2025-06-18
Referred to Com. on L., P.E. & R.
referral-committee
2025-06-23
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on L., P.E. & R.
amendment-introduction,amendment-passage,committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee
2025-06-24
Re-referred to Com. on RLS.
referral-committee
2025-06-24
Withdrawn from committee.
withdrawal
2025-06-25
Re-referred to Coms. on L., P.E. & R. and JUD.
referral-committee
2025-06-30
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on L., P.E. & R.
amendment-introduction,amendment-passage,committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee
2025-07-09
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on JUD. (Ayes 4. Noes 1.) (July 9). Re-referred to Com. on JUD.
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee
2025-07-16
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 11. Noes 2.) (July 15).
amendment-introduction,amendment-passage,committee-passage,referral-committee
2025-07-17
Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
amendment-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee
2025-08-13
In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.
2025-08-19
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on APPR.
amendment-introduction,amendment-passage,committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee
2025-08-25
In committee: Referred to suspense file.
referral-committee
2025-08-29
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 5. Noes 2.) (August 29).
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable
2025-08-29
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
reading-1,reading-2,reading-3
2025-09-04
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 29. Noes 10. Page 2517.).
passage,reading-1,reading-3
2025-09-04
Re-referred to Com. on L. & E. pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.2.
referral-committee
2025-09-04
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending.
2025-09-09
Joint Rule 62(a), file notice suspended. (Page 3061.)
2025-09-10
From committee: That the Senate amendments be concurred in. (Ayes 5. Noes 0.) (September 10).
committee-passage
2025-09-11
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 57. Noes 13. Page 3335.).
amendment-passage,committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable
2025-09-23
Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 4 p.m.
executive-receipt
2025-10-13
Vetoed by Governor.
executive-veto
2025-10-13
Consideration of Governor's veto pending.
2026-01-22
Consideration of Governor's veto stricken from file.
veto-override-failure
Versions
- 02/20/25 - Introduced — 2025-02-20Compare
- 06/23/25 - Amended Senate — 2025-06-23Compare
- 06/30/25 - Amended Senate — 2025-06-30Compare
- 07/17/25 - Amended Senate — 2025-07-17Compare
- 08/19/25 - Amended Senate — 2025-08-19Compare
- 09/15/25 - Enrolled — 2025-09-15Compare
- AB1136Compare
- (document, no version)Compare
Documents
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- text/html
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
Votes
Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]
2025-04-02 · pass · 6-0
Member-level votes (7)
- Chen: yes
- Flora: yes
- Ward: yes
- Ortega: yes
- Lee: yes
- Kalra: yes
- Elhawary: other
Do pass.
2025-05-23 · pass · 12-0
Member-level votes (15)
- Calderon: yes
- Elhawary: yes
- Hart: yes
- Mark González: yes
- Arambula: yes
- Pacheco: yes
- Solache: yes
- Ta: yes
- Caloza: yes
- Wicks: yes
- Pellerin: yes
- Fong: yes
- Sanchez: other
- Dixon: other
- Tangipa: other
AB 1136 Ortega Assembly Third Reading
2025-06-03 · pass · 68-2
Member-level votes (79)
- Berman: yes
- Jeff Gonzalez: yes
- Zbur: yes
- Celeste Rodriguez: yes
- Bonta: yes
- Blanca Rubio: yes
- Fong: yes
- Harabedian: yes
- Rivas: yes
- Elhawary: yes
- Bauer-Kahan: yes
- Valencia: yes
- Wilson: yes
- Wicks: yes
- Bennett: yes
- Haney: yes
- Quirk-Silva: yes
- Caloza: yes
- Muratsuchi: yes
- Soria: yes
- Schiavo: yes
- Ávila Farías: yes
- Gabriel: yes
- Mark González: yes
- Nguyen: yes
- Chen: yes
- Papan: yes
- Ransom: yes
- Bains: yes
- Addis: yes
- Kalra: yes
- Lowenthal: yes
- Ta: yes
- Solache: yes
- Lee: yes
- Alanis: yes
- Ortega: yes
- Calderon: yes
- Patel: yes
- Ward: yes
- Hoover: yes
- Irwin: yes
- Michelle Rodriguez: yes
- Krell: yes
- Pellerin: yes
- Sharp-Collins: yes
- Dixon: yes
- Bryan: yes
- Boerner: yes
- Davies: yes
- Garcia: yes
- Gipson: yes
- McKinnor: yes
- Ramos: yes
- Stefani: yes
- Connolly: yes
- Alvarez: yes
- Petrie-Norris: yes
- Ahrens: yes
- Wallis: yes
- Jackson: yes
- Schultz: yes
- Aguiar-Curry: yes
- Arambula: yes
- Rogers: yes
- Pacheco: yes
- Hart: yes
- Carrillo: yes
- DeMaio: no
- Flora: no
- Sanchez: other
- Tangipa: other
- Ellis: other
- Hadwick: other
- Patterson: other
- Gallagher: other
- Castillo: other
- Lackey: other
- Macedo: other
Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Judiciary]
2025-07-09 · pass · 4-1
Member-level votes (5)
- Laird: yes
- Durazo: yes
- Cortese: yes
- Smallwood-Cuevas: yes
- Strickland: no
Do pass as amended, but first amend, and re-refer to the Committee on [Appropriations]
2025-07-15 · pass · 11-2
Member-level votes (13)
- Caballero: yes
- Wahab: yes
- Ashby: yes
- Wiener: yes
- Laird: yes
- Umberg: yes
- Weber Pierson: yes
- Stern: yes
- Allen: yes
- Arreguín: yes
- Durazo: yes
- Valladares: no
- Niello: no
Placed on suspense file
2025-08-25 · pass · 6-0
Member-level votes (7)
- Grayson: yes
- Cabaldon: yes
- Caballero: yes
- Dahle: yes
- Richardson: yes
- Seyarto: yes
- Wahab: other
Do pass
2025-08-29 · pass · 5-2
Member-level votes (7)
- Richardson: yes
- Grayson: yes
- Wahab: yes
- Caballero: yes
- Cabaldon: yes
- Dahle: no
- Seyarto: no
3rd Reading AB1136 Ortega et al. By Durazo
2025-09-04 · pass · 29-10
Member-level votes (40)
- Stern: yes
- Durazo: yes
- Cabaldon: yes
- McGuire: yes
- Laird: yes
- Limón: yes
- Menjivar: yes
- Wahab: yes
- Rubio: yes
- Pérez: yes
- Cortese: yes
- Gonzalez: yes
- Umberg: yes
- Allen: yes
- Smallwood-Cuevas: yes
- Richardson: yes
- Blakespear: yes
- Arreguín: yes
- Hurtado: yes
- Padilla: yes
- Caballero: yes
- Weber Pierson: yes
- Ashby: yes
- Archuleta: yes
- Grayson: yes
- Wiener: yes
- Cervantes: yes
- McNerney: yes
- Becker: yes
- Niello: no
- Grove: no
- Jones: no
- Ochoa Bogh: no
- Alvarado-Gil: no
- Valladares: no
- Dahle: no
- Seyarto: no
- Strickland: no
- Choi: no
- Reyes: other
With recommendation: That Senate amendments be concurred in.
2025-09-10 · pass · 5-0
Member-level votes (7)
- Ortega: yes
- Elhawary: yes
- Ward: yes
- Kalra: yes
- Lee: yes
- Flora: other
- Chen: other
AB 1136 Ortega Concurrence in Senate Amendments
2025-09-12 · pass · 57-13
Member-level votes (80)
- Ahrens: yes
- Mark González: yes
- Quirk-Silva: yes
- Gipson: yes
- Rogers: yes
- Addis: yes
- Ward: yes
- Haney: yes
- Hart: yes
- Fong: yes
- Elhawary: yes
- Calderon: yes
- Wilson: yes
- Carrillo: yes
- Bains: yes
- Ransom: yes
- Soria: yes
- Michelle Rodriguez: yes
- Berman: yes
- Valencia: yes
- Wicks: yes
- Celeste Rodriguez: yes
- Arambula: yes
- Connolly: yes
- Schultz: yes
- Bauer-Kahan: yes
- Bennett: yes
- Papan: yes
- Bonta: yes
- Aguiar-Curry: yes
- Pacheco: yes
- Boerner: yes
- Alvarez: yes
- Lee: yes
- Stefani: yes
- Caloza: yes
- Sharp-Collins: yes
- Nguyen: yes
- Ortega: yes
- Solache: yes
- Lowenthal: yes
- Jackson: yes
- Bryan: yes
- Petrie-Norris: yes
- Harabedian: yes
- Gabriel: yes
- Zbur: yes
- McKinnor: yes
- Pellerin: yes
- Muratsuchi: yes
- Krell: yes
- Irwin: yes
- Ramos: yes
- Patel: yes
- Kalra: yes
- Rivas: yes
- Garcia: yes
- Johnson: no
- Dixon: no
- Hadwick: no
- Lackey: no
- Ávila Farías: no
- Macedo: no
- Gallagher: no
- Sanchez: no
- Ta: no
- Ellis: no
- Flora: no
- Patterson: no
- DeMaio: no
- Hoover: other
- Tangipa: other
- Blanca Rubio: other
- Schiavo: other
- Alanis: other
- Jeff Gonzalez: other
- Chen: other
- Castillo: other
- Davies: other
- Wallis: other
Related bills
No related bills recorded for this bill.
Official source
Attribution
Data from openstates_bulk_csv, retrieved 2026-07-24T01:34:27.960412Z
Inspect retained evidence for changes recorded after evidence tracking began:
Use this data
Every field on this page is available from the free public API — no key or licence required. Fetch this bill as JSON: GET /api/v1/bills?jurisdiction=CA&identifier=AB 1136. See the API docs or the MCP server for AI assistants.
Known limitations
- Sponsor party and chamber affiliation are not yet captured by this API.
- Committee referrals are not yet captured.
- Some documents have no extracted text yet, so version comparison may be limited.
See the methodology page for data sources and limitations.