Bill Commons

CA SB 1004

enacted

Law enforcement: masks.

California · 2025-2026 Regular Session · upper

Follow this bill’s action updates (Atom)

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 SB 1004 pass?

Yes. CA SB 1004 has been enacted into law. Latest recorded action (2026-09-29): Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 757, Statutes of 2026.

What is CA SB 1004 about?

Existing law makes it a crime for a law enforcement officer to wear a facial covering in the performance of their duties, except as specified. Existing law defines law enforcement officer for these purposes as anyone designated by California law as a peace officer who is employed by a city, county, or other local agency, and any officer or agent of a federal law enforcement agency, agency or law enforcement agency of another state, or any person acting on behalf of a federal law enforcement agency. This bill would add peace officers employed by a state agency to the definition of law enforcement officers, thereby making those law enforcement officers subject to those criminal penalties. The bill would specify that facial coverings does not include certain items, including, among other things, sunglasses. The bill would, for all of the items excluded from the definition of facial coverings, limit that exclusion if the items are combined or otherwise used in a manner intended to conceal or obscure an officer's identity. By expanding the scope of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law prohibits any person who is found to have committed an assault, battery, false imprisonment, false arrest, abuse of process, or malicious prosecution, while wearing a facial covering in a knowing and willful violation of these provisions, from asserting any privilege or immunity for their tortious conduct against a claim of civil liability, and makes that person liable for the greater of actual damages or statutory damages of not less than $10,000, whichever is greater. This bill would instead make a person who is found liable for false imprisonment or false arrest liable for those damages if the trier of fact finds that the person knowingly and willfully concealed their identity through the use of a facial covering at the time of the conduct giving rise to liability. Existing law requires a law enforcement agency operating in California to, by July 1, 2026, maintain and publicly post a written policy limiting the use of facial coverings, as specified. Existing law defines a law enforcement agency for these purposes as any entity of a city, county, or other local agency, that employs anyone designated by California law as a peace officer, any federal law enforcement agency, or any law enforcement agency of another state. This bill would add to the definition of law enforcement agency, a state entity that employs a peace officer and would change the date any law enforcement agency has to comply with that requirement to January 1, 2027. The bill would also require those policies to exempt certain surveillance operations related to enforcement of the Fish and Game Code, or similar federal law. 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 SB 1004?

Wiener is the primary sponsor of CA SB 1004, joined by 21 cosponsors.

Description

Existing law makes it a crime for a law enforcement officer to wear a facial covering in the performance of their duties, except as specified. Existing law defines law enforcement officer for these purposes as anyone designated by California law as a peace officer who is employed by a city, county, or other local agency, and any officer or agent of a federal law enforcement agency, agency or law enforcement agency of another state, or any person acting on behalf of a federal law enforcement agency. This bill would add peace officers employed by a state agency to the definition of law enforcement officers, thereby making those law enforcement officers subject to those criminal penalties. The bill would specify that facial coverings does not include certain items, including, among other things, sunglasses. The bill would, for all of the items excluded from the definition of facial coverings, limit that exclusion if the items are combined or otherwise used in a manner intended to conceal or obscure an officer's identity. By expanding the scope of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law prohibits any person who is found to have committed an assault, battery, false imprisonment, false arrest, abuse of process, or malicious prosecution, while wearing a facial covering in a knowing and willful violation of these provisions, from asserting any privilege or immunity for their tortious conduct against a claim of civil liability, and makes that person liable for the greater of actual damages or statutory damages of not less than $10,000, whichever is greater. This bill would instead make a person who is found liable for false imprisonment or false arrest liable for those damages if the trier of fact finds that the person knowingly and willfully concealed their identity through the use of a facial covering at the time of the conduct giving rise to liability. Existing law requires a law enforcement agency operating in California to, by July 1, 2026, maintain and publicly post a written policy limiting the use of facial coverings, as specified. Existing law defines a law enforcement agency for these purposes as any entity of a city, county, or other local agency, that employs anyone designated by California law as a peace officer, any federal law enforcement agency, or any law enforcement agency of another state. This bill would add to the definition of law enforcement agency, a state entity that employs a peace officer and would change the date any law enforcement agency has to comply with that requirement to January 1, 2027. The bill would also require those policies to exempt certain surveillance operations related to enforcement of the Fish and Game Code, or similar federal law. 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
2026-02-09
Latest action
2026-09-29 — Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 757, Statutes of 2026.
Bill type
bill
Last updated
—

Subjects

Sponsors

  • Wienerauthor
  • Arreguínauthor
  • Pérezauthor
  • Wahabauthor
  • Bryanprincipal coauthor
  • Carrilloprincipal coauthor
  • Garciaprincipal coauthor
  • Schultzprincipal coauthor
  • Gonzalezcoauthor
  • McNerneycoauthor
  • Menjivarcoauthor
  • Smallwood-Cuevascoauthor
  • Weber Piersoncoauthor
  • Connollycoauthor
  • Elhawarycoauthor
  • Mark Gonzálezcoauthor
  • Kalracoauthor
  • Leecoauthor
  • Ortegacoauthor
  • Quirk-Silvacoauthor
  • Sharp-Collinscoauthor
  • Solachecoauthor

Committees

Not provided by source.

Action timeline

Newest first

  1. 2026-09-29

    Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 757, Statutes of 2026.

    became-law

  2. 2026-09-29

    Approved by the Governor.

    executive-signature

  3. 2026-09-02

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

    executive-receipt

  4. 2026-08-27

    Assembly amendments concurred in. (Ayes 28. Noes 11.) Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.

    amendment-passage,committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable

  5. 2026-08-26

    Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate.

    passage,reading-1,reading-3

  6. 2026-08-26

    In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.

  7. 2026-08-26

    Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 44. Noes 22. Page 6611.) Ordered to the Senate.

    passage,reading-1,reading-3

  8. 2026-08-17

    Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

    reading-1,reading-2,reading-3

  9. 2026-08-13

    Assembly Rule 63 suspended.

  10. 2026-08-13

    Read second time and amended. Ordered to second reading.

    amendment-passage,reading-1,reading-2

  11. 2026-08-13

    From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 11. Noes 4.) (August 13).

    amendment-passage,committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable

  12. 2026-08-05

    August 5 set for first hearing. Placed on suspense file.

  13. 2026-06-25

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

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

  14. 2026-06-24

    From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 5. Noes 3.) (June 23).

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

  15. 2026-06-11

    June 9 set for first hearing canceled at the request of author.

  16. 2026-05-26

    Referred to Com. on PUB. S.

    referral-committee

  17. 2026-05-20

    In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.

    reading-1

  18. 2026-05-19

    Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 28. Noes 9. Page 4358.) Ordered to the Assembly.

    passage,reading-1,reading-3

  19. 2026-05-18

    Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

    reading-1,reading-2,reading-3

  20. 2026-05-14

    From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 5. Noes 2. Page 4260.) (May 14).

    amendment-passage,committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable

  21. 2026-05-14

    Read second time and amended. Ordered to second reading.

    amendment-passage,reading-1,reading-2

  22. 2026-05-08

    Set for hearing May 14.

  23. 2026-04-27

    April 27 hearing: Placed on APPR. suspense file.

  24. 2026-04-21

    Set for hearing April 27.

  25. 2026-04-16

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

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

  26. 2026-04-15

    From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 5. Noes 1. Page 3871.) (April 14).

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

  27. 2026-03-27

    Set for hearing April 14.

  28. 2026-02-18

    Referred to Com. on PUB. S.

    referral-committee

  29. 2026-02-10

    From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 12.

  30. 2026-02-09

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

    introduction,reading-1,referral-committee

Versions

  • 02/09/26 - Introduced — 2026-02-09Compare
  • 04/16/26 - Amended Senate — 2026-04-16Compare
  • 05/14/26 - Amended Senate — 2026-05-14Compare
  • 06/25/26 - Amended Assembly — 2026-06-25Compare
  • 08/13/26 - Amended Assembly — 2026-08-13Compare
  • 08/30/26 - Enrolled — 2026-08-30Compare
  • 09/29/26 - Chaptered — 2026-09-29Compare
  • (document, no version)Compare
  • SB1004Compare

Documents

Votes

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

    2026-04-14 · pass · 5-1

    Member-level votes (6)
    • Arreguín: yes
    • Pérez: yes
    • Caballero: yes
    • Wiener: yes
    • Cortese: yes
    • Seyarto: no

  • Placed on suspense file

    2026-04-27 · pass · 7-0

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

  • Do pass as amended

    2026-05-14 · pass · 5-2

    Member-level votes (7)
    • Wahab: yes
    • Cervantes: yes
    • Cabaldon: yes
    • Richardson: yes
    • Grayson: yes
    • Dahle: no
    • Seyarto: no

  • 3rd Reading SB1004 Wiener et al.

    2026-05-19 · pass · 28-9

    Member-level votes (40)
    • Weber Pierson: yes
    • Cortese: yes
    • Wiener: yes
    • Limón: yes
    • Grayson: yes
    • Becker: yes
    • Cervantes: yes
    • Rubio: yes
    • McGuire: yes
    • Stern: yes
    • Smallwood-Cuevas: yes
    • Gonzalez: yes
    • Padilla: yes
    • Durazo: yes
    • Cabaldon: yes
    • Arreguín: yes
    • Umberg: yes
    • Ashby: yes
    • Menjivar: yes
    • Laird: yes
    • Blakespear: yes
    • Archuleta: yes
    • Richardson: yes
    • McNerney: yes
    • Pérez: yes
    • Caballero: yes
    • Reyes: yes
    • Wahab: yes
    • Strickland: no
    • Grove: no
    • Alvarado-Gil: no
    • Ochoa Bogh: no
    • Dahle: no
    • Jones: no
    • Choi: no
    • Valladares: no
    • Seyarto: no
    • Allen: other
    • Hurtado: other
    • Niello: other

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

    2026-06-23 · pass · 5-3

    Member-level votes (9)
    • Sharp-Collins: yes
    • Mark González: yes
    • Harabedian: yes
    • Haney: yes
    • Schultz: yes
    • Lackey: no
    • Ramos: no
    • Alanis: no
    • Nguyen: other

Related bills

No related bills recorded for this bill.

Official source

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260SB1004

Attribution

Data from openstates_api_sync, retrieved 2026-10-02T12:31:02.335364Z

Inspect retained evidence for changes recorded after evidence tracking began:

Source and document changesStatus and relationship changes

Session-wide evidence can include changes to other bills:

Bulk imports for this sessionSession dates and activity

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=SB 1004. 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.