Bill Commons

CA AB 392

withdrawn

Pornographic internet websites: consent.

California · 2025-2026 Regular Session · lower

Quick answers

Did CA AB 392 pass?

No. CA AB 392 was withdrawn on 2025-08-29 and is no longer under consideration. Latest recorded action (2025-08-29): In committee: Held under submission.

What is CA AB 392 about?

Existing law generally regulates obscene content on internet websites, including by requiring a social media platform to provide, in a mechanism that is reasonably accessible to users, a means for a user who is a California resident to report material to the social media platform that the user reasonably believes is, among other things, child sexual abuse material. This bill would require a person who operates an internet website to exercise ordinary care and reasonable diligence to ensure that any sexually explicit content, as defined, uploaded to the operator's pornographic internet website does not include a depicted individual, as defined. The bill would require a user to, before uploading sexually explicit content to a pornographic internet website, submit, among other things, a statement certifying, not under penalty of perjury, that any individual depicted in the sexually explicit content was not a minor at the time the sexually explicit content was created, consented to being depicted in the sexually explicit content, and consents to the sexually explicit content being uploaded to the internet on the pornographic internet website. The bill would make knowingly providing false information in that statement an infraction punishable by a fine, as specified. By creating a new infraction, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require an operator of a pornographic internet website to verify a user's email address before permitting the user to upload sexually explicit content to the operator's pornographic internet website. This bill would authorize a depicted individual and a public prosecutor to bring a civil action to enforce the bill, as prescribed. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Who sponsors CA AB 392?

Dixon is the primary sponsor of CA AB 392.

Description

Existing law generally regulates obscene content on internet websites, including by requiring a social media platform to provide, in a mechanism that is reasonably accessible to users, a means for a user who is a California resident to report material to the social media platform that the user reasonably believes is, among other things, child sexual abuse material. This bill would require a person who operates an internet website to exercise ordinary care and reasonable diligence to ensure that any sexually explicit content, as defined, uploaded to the operator's pornographic internet website does not include a depicted individual, as defined. The bill would require a user to, before uploading sexually explicit content to a pornographic internet website, submit, among other things, a statement certifying, not under penalty of perjury, that any individual depicted in the sexually explicit content was not a minor at the time the sexually explicit content was created, consented to being depicted in the sexually explicit content, and consents to the sexually explicit content being uploaded to the internet on the pornographic internet website. The bill would make knowingly providing false information in that statement an infraction punishable by a fine, as specified. By creating a new infraction, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require an operator of a pornographic internet website to verify a user's email address before permitting the user to upload sexually explicit content to the operator's pornographic internet website. This bill would authorize a depicted individual and a public prosecutor to bring a civil action to enforce the bill, as prescribed. 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.

Introduced
2025-03-26
Latest action
2025-08-29 — In committee: Held under submission.
Bill type
bill
Last updated

Subjects

Sponsors

  • Dixonauthor

Committees

Not provided by source.

Action timeline

  1. 2025-02-03

    Read first time. To print.

    reading-1

  2. 2025-02-04

    From printer. May be heard in committee March 6.

  3. 2025-03-03

    Referred to Coms. on P. & C.P. and JUD.

    referral-committee

  4. 2025-03-11

    In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.

  5. 2025-03-26

    From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on P. & C.P. Read second time and amended.

    amendment-introduction,amendment-passage,committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee

  6. 2025-03-27

    Re-referred to Com. on P. & C.P.

    referral-committee

  7. 2025-04-02

    From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on JUD. (Ayes 14. Noes 0.) (April 1). Re-referred to Com. on JUD.

    committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee

  8. 2025-04-22

    From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 12. Noes 0.) (April 22).

    amendment-introduction,amendment-passage,committee-passage,referral-committee

  9. 2025-04-23

    Read second time and amended.

    amendment-passage,reading-1,reading-2

  10. 2025-04-24

    Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

    referral-committee

  11. 2025-04-30

    In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to suspense file.

    referral-committee

  12. 2025-05-23

    Assembly Rule 63 suspended. (Ayes 51. Noes 16. Page 1644.)

  13. 2025-05-23

    From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 14. Noes 0.) (May 23).

    amendment-introduction,amendment-passage,committee-passage

  14. 2025-05-23

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

    amendment-passage,reading-1,reading-2

  15. 2025-05-27

    Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

    reading-1,reading-2,reading-3

  16. 2025-06-05

    Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 78. Noes 0. Page 2111.)

    passage,reading-1,reading-3

  17. 2025-06-09

    In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.

    reading-1,referral-committee

  18. 2025-06-18

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

    referral-committee

  19. 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 JUD.

    amendment-introduction,amendment-passage,committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee

  20. 2025-07-09

    From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on PUB. S. (Ayes 13. Noes 0.) (July 8).

    amendment-introduction,amendment-passage,committee-passage,referral-committee

  21. 2025-07-10

    Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on PUB. S.

    amendment-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee

  22. 2025-07-14

    Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

    referral-committee

  23. 2025-07-14

    Withdrawn from committee.

    withdrawal

  24. 2025-08-18

    In committee: Referred to suspense file.

    referral-committee

  25. 2025-08-29

    In committee: Held under submission.

Versions

  • 02/03/25 - Introduced — 2025-02-03Compare
  • 03/26/25 - Amended Assembly — 2025-03-26Compare
  • 04/23/25 - Amended Assembly — 2025-04-23Compare
  • 05/23/25 - Amended Assembly — 2025-05-23Compare
  • 06/30/25 - Amended Senate — 2025-06-30Compare
  • 07/10/25 - Amended Senate — 2025-07-10Compare
  • AB392Compare
  • (document, no version)Compare

Documents

Votes

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

    2025-04-01 · pass · 14-0

    Member-level votes (15)
    • Berman: yes
    • McKinnor: yes
    • Dixon: yes
    • Bryan: yes
    • DeMaio: yes
    • Macedo: yes
    • Patterson: yes
    • Ortega: yes
    • Petrie-Norris: yes
    • Irwin: yes
    • Ward: yes
    • Pellerin: yes
    • Lowenthal: yes
    • Wilson: yes
    • Bauer-Kahan: other
  • Do pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]

    2025-04-22 · pass · 12-0

    Member-level votes (12)
    • Kalra: yes
    • Harabedian: yes
    • Bauer-Kahan: yes
    • Macedo: yes
    • Sanchez: yes
    • Lee: yes
    • Dixon: yes
    • Stefani: yes
    • Zbur: yes
    • Connolly: yes
    • Pacheco: yes
    • Bryan: yes
  • Do pass as amended.

    2025-05-23 · pass · 14-0

    Member-level votes (15)
    • Calderon: yes
    • Elhawary: yes
    • Dixon: yes
    • Hart: yes
    • Mark González: yes
    • Arambula: yes
    • Pacheco: yes
    • Solache: yes
    • Ta: yes
    • Caloza: yes
    • Wicks: yes
    • Pellerin: yes
    • Fong: yes
    • Tangipa: yes
    • Sanchez: other
  • AB 392 Dixon Assembly Third Reading

    2025-06-05 · pass · 78-0

    Member-level votes (79)
    • Lee: yes
    • Connolly: yes
    • Caloza: yes
    • Calderon: yes
    • Bonta: yes
    • Hoover: yes
    • Bryan: yes
    • Ta: yes
    • Berman: yes
    • Soria: yes
    • Castillo: yes
    • Hadwick: yes
    • Jeff Gonzalez: yes
    • Patel: yes
    • Flora: yes
    • Patterson: yes
    • Haney: yes
    • Fong: yes
    • Dixon: yes
    • Bauer-Kahan: yes
    • Davies: yes
    • Ramos: yes
    • Rogers: yes
    • DeMaio: yes
    • Alvarez: yes
    • Boerner: yes
    • Elhawary: yes
    • Ellis: yes
    • Jackson: yes
    • Gallagher: yes
    • Quirk-Silva: yes
    • Kalra: yes
    • Lackey: yes
    • Sharp-Collins: yes
    • Ward: yes
    • Wicks: yes
    • Chen: yes
    • Muratsuchi: yes
    • Papan: yes
    • Arambula: yes
    • Bennett: yes
    • Wilson: yes
    • Pellerin: yes
    • Valencia: yes
    • Tangipa: yes
    • Petrie-Norris: yes
    • Macedo: yes
    • Gabriel: yes
    • Ransom: yes
    • Addis: yes
    • Harabedian: yes
    • Lowenthal: yes
    • Hart: yes
    • Sanchez: yes
    • Rivas: yes
    • Michelle Rodriguez: yes
    • Ahrens: yes
    • Irwin: yes
    • Mark González: yes
    • Pacheco: yes
    • Blanca Rubio: yes
    • Stefani: yes
    • Zbur: yes
    • Ortega: other
    • Schultz: yes
    • Aguiar-Curry: yes
    • Carrillo: yes
    • Solache: yes
    • Nguyen: yes
    • Alanis: yes
    • Wallis: yes
    • Gipson: yes
    • Bains: yes
    • Krell: yes
    • Ávila Farías: yes
    • Schiavo: yes
    • McKinnor: yes
    • Garcia: yes
    • Celeste Rodriguez: yes
  • Do pass as amended, but first amend, and re-refer to the Committee on [Public Safety]

    2025-07-08 · pass · 13-0

    Member-level votes (13)
    • Arreguín: yes
    • Valladares: yes
    • Allen: yes
    • Stern: yes
    • Caballero: yes
    • Wahab: yes
    • Laird: yes
    • Niello: yes
    • Weber Pierson: yes
    • Wiener: yes
    • Ashby: yes
    • Durazo: yes
    • Umberg: yes
  • Placed on suspense file

    2025-08-18 · pass · 7-0

    Member-level votes (7)
    • Richardson: yes
    • Seyarto: yes
    • Caballero: yes
    • Cabaldon: yes
    • Dahle: yes
    • Wahab: yes
    • Grayson: yes

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 392. 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.