CA AB 923
deadDetention and incarceration of pregnant and postpartum defendants.
California · 2025-2026 Regular Session · lower
Subscribe in a feed reader. The feed covers recorded actions from the last 30 days; Bill Commons may record an action after it happened at the legislature.
Quick answers
Did CA AB 923 pass?
No. CA AB 923 did not pass — it was defeated or died in the legislative process. Latest recorded action (2026-02-02): From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56.
What is CA AB 923 about?
Existing law gives a judge discretion when deciding various matters in a criminal proceeding, including, among other things, issuing bail or releasing a defendant on their own recognizance, accepting a diversion or deferred entry of judgment agreement, and imposing sentences and granting probation. This bill would, when a court is exercising its discretion with regard to these matters, make a rebuttable presumption against detention and incarceration of a pregnant or postpartum defendant, as defined, if the defendant provides the court and district attorney with notice of the defendant's status as a pregnant or postpartum defendant at each applicable stage of the proceedings. The bill would require a court that decides to detain or incarcerate a defendant after this consideration to make specific findings on the record that the risk to public safety or any other factor the court is required to consider is substantial enough to outweigh the risk of incarceration, as specified. The bill would authorize a person who may be pregnant or postpartum and who is arrested or in custody in a county jail to request a pregnancy test upon or following admission to the county jail and would require the county jail to provide a pregnancy test upon request and allow the person to take the pregnancy test within 24 hours after the request. The bill would require a county jail to keep a record of specified information, including the total number of incarcerated pregnant people at that county jail. By imposing additional duties on county jails, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would authorize a pregnant or postpartum defendant to request a stay of execution of their sentence by filing a written request to the court if the pregnant or postpartum defendant is detained or incarcerated in a county jail for any period of time through the end of the pregnancy or the postpartum period, except as specified. The bill would require the court to apply the rebuttable presumption above when considering whether to grant that stay of execution. The bill would authorize a court to order a stay of execution of the sentence for any period of time through the end of the pregnancy or the postpartum period. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Who sponsors CA AB 923?
Quirk-Silva is the primary sponsor of CA AB 923.
Description
Existing law gives a judge discretion when deciding various matters in a criminal proceeding, including, among other things, issuing bail or releasing a defendant on their own recognizance, accepting a diversion or deferred entry of judgment agreement, and imposing sentences and granting probation. This bill would, when a court is exercising its discretion with regard to these matters, make a rebuttable presumption against detention and incarceration of a pregnant or postpartum defendant, as defined, if the defendant provides the court and district attorney with notice of the defendant's status as a pregnant or postpartum defendant at each applicable stage of the proceedings. The bill would require a court that decides to detain or incarcerate a defendant after this consideration to make specific findings on the record that the risk to public safety or any other factor the court is required to consider is substantial enough to outweigh the risk of incarceration, as specified. The bill would authorize a person who may be pregnant or postpartum and who is arrested or in custody in a county jail to request a pregnancy test upon or following admission to the county jail and would require the county jail to provide a pregnancy test upon request and allow the person to take the pregnancy test within 24 hours after the request. The bill would require a county jail to keep a record of specified information, including the total number of incarcerated pregnant people at that county jail. By imposing additional duties on county jails, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would authorize a pregnant or postpartum defendant to request a stay of execution of their sentence by filing a written request to the court if the pregnant or postpartum defendant is detained or incarcerated in a county jail for any period of time through the end of the pregnancy or the postpartum period, except as specified. The bill would require the court to apply the rebuttable presumption above when considering whether to grant that stay of execution. The bill would authorize a court to order a stay of execution of the sentence for any period of time through the end of the pregnancy or the postpartum period. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
- Introduced
- —
- Latest action
- 2026-02-02 — From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56.
- Bill type
- bill
- Last updated
- —
Subjects
Sponsors
- Quirk-Silvaauthor
Committees
Not provided by source.
Action timeline
Newest first
2026-02-02
From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56.
committee-passage,failure
2026-01-31
Died pursuant to Art. IV, Sec. 10(c) of the Constitution.
failure
2025-05-23
In committee: Held under submission.
2025-04-30
In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to suspense file.
referral-committee
2025-04-09
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 0.) (April 8). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee
2025-03-10
Referred to Com. on PUB. S.
referral-committee
2025-02-20
From printer. May be heard in committee March 22.
2025-02-19
Read first time. To print.
reading-1
Versions
Documents
- application/pdf
- text/html
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
Votes
Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]
2025-04-08 · pass · 6-0
Member-level votes (9)
- Mark González: yes
- Sharp-Collins: yes
- Schultz: yes
- Harabedian: yes
- Ramos: yes
- Haney: yes
- Lackey: other
- Alanis: other
- Nguyen: 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:
Session-wide evidence can include changes to other bills:
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 923. 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.