Bill Commons

CA SB 1105

vetoed

Law enforcement.

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 1105 pass?

No. CA SB 1105 passed the legislature but was vetoed. Latest recorded action (2026-09-30): In Senate. Consideration of Governor's veto pending.

What is CA SB 1105 about?

Existing law defines those persons who are peace officers in the state, grants certain authority to those individuals and their employing entities, and places certain requirements on those individuals and their employing entities. Under existing law, federal criminal investigators and law enforcement officers are not California peace officers but are granted specified limited arrest authority in limited circumstances including when violations of state and local laws occur in their presence, when there is an immediate danger to persons or property, when detaining a person for evaluation or treatment who, due to a mental illness, is a danger to themselves or others, and when requested by a California law enforcement agency to be involved in a joint task force or criminal investigation. Existing law additionally grants peace officer status to federal employees who comply with certain training requirements, while they are engaged in enforcing state or local law on and adjacent to property owned or possessed by the United States Government, with the written consent of local law enforcement officials, as specified. This bill would remove certain arrest authority or peace officer status for federal criminal investigators, law enforcement officers, and federal employees, including for the purposes of executing a warrant for the arrest of a person. The bill would authorize deputized tribal law enforcement officers of the federal Bureau of Indian Affairs to exercise the powers of arrest, as specified, if, among other things, they are engaged in the enforcement of federal criminal law and they are exercising arrest powers that are incidental to the performance of those federal duties. The bill would also authorize certain federal employees of, among other agencies, the National Park Service and the Bureau of Land Management, if they are enforcing specified provisions of state law on property owned by the United States government, to exercise peace officer status with the written consent of the sheriff or the chief of police from the respective jurisdiction. The bill would also prohibit a California law enforcement agency, as defined, from entering into an interagency agreement, unless, among other things, the agreement is in writing and expressly provides that the agency shall not engage in racial or identity profiling, as specified. The bill would deem any interagency agreement in existence on January 1, 2027, valid, and would authorize that agreement to remain in effect until July 1, 2027. The bill would require, by no later than July 1, 2027, that the agreement be amended to include the provisions described above, including a prohibition on engaging in certain conduct, including racial or identity profiling. By increasing the duties on local law enforcement, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would make these provisions severable. 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. This bill would make related findings and declarations.

Who sponsors CA SB 1105?

Pérez is the primary sponsor of CA SB 1105, joined by 12 cosponsors.

Description

Existing law defines those persons who are peace officers in the state, grants certain authority to those individuals and their employing entities, and places certain requirements on those individuals and their employing entities. Under existing law, federal criminal investigators and law enforcement officers are not California peace officers but are granted specified limited arrest authority in limited circumstances including when violations of state and local laws occur in their presence, when there is an immediate danger to persons or property, when detaining a person for evaluation or treatment who, due to a mental illness, is a danger to themselves or others, and when requested by a California law enforcement agency to be involved in a joint task force or criminal investigation. Existing law additionally grants peace officer status to federal employees who comply with certain training requirements, while they are engaged in enforcing state or local law on and adjacent to property owned or possessed by the United States Government, with the written consent of local law enforcement officials, as specified. This bill would remove certain arrest authority or peace officer status for federal criminal investigators, law enforcement officers, and federal employees, including for the purposes of executing a warrant for the arrest of a person. The bill would authorize deputized tribal law enforcement officers of the federal Bureau of Indian Affairs to exercise the powers of arrest, as specified, if, among other things, they are engaged in the enforcement of federal criminal law and they are exercising arrest powers that are incidental to the performance of those federal duties. The bill would also authorize certain federal employees of, among other agencies, the National Park Service and the Bureau of Land Management, if they are enforcing specified provisions of state law on property owned by the United States government, to exercise peace officer status with the written consent of the sheriff or the chief of police from the respective jurisdiction. The bill would also prohibit a California law enforcement agency, as defined, from entering into an interagency agreement, unless, among other things, the agreement is in writing and expressly provides that the agency shall not engage in racial or identity profiling, as specified. The bill would deem any interagency agreement in existence on January 1, 2027, valid, and would authorize that agreement to remain in effect until July 1, 2027. The bill would require, by no later than July 1, 2027, that the agreement be amended to include the provisions described above, including a prohibition on engaging in certain conduct, including racial or identity profiling. By increasing the duties on local law enforcement, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would make these provisions severable. 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. This bill would make related findings and declarations.

Introduced
2026-02-13
Latest action
2026-09-30 — In Senate. Consideration of Governor's veto pending.
Bill type
bill
Last updated
—

Subjects

Sponsors

  • Pérezauthor
  • Gonzalezcoauthor
  • McNerneycoauthor
  • Wienercoauthor
  • Connollycoauthor
  • Elhawarycoauthor
  • Fongcoauthor
  • Mark Gonzálezcoauthor
  • Haneycoauthor
  • Ortegacoauthor
  • Wardcoauthor
  • Gipsoncoauthor
  • Leecoauthor

Committees

Not provided by source.

Action timeline

Newest first

  1. 2026-09-30

    In Senate. Consideration of Governor's veto pending.

  2. 2026-09-30

    Vetoed by the Governor.

    executive-veto

  3. 2026-09-03

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

    executive-receipt

  4. 2026-08-27

    Assembly amendments concurred in. (Ayes 27. Noes 11.) Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.

  5. 2026-08-25

    Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate.

  6. 2026-08-25

    In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.

  7. 2026-08-25

    Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 58. Noes 19. Page 6472.) Ordered to the Senate.

    passage,reading-1,reading-3

  8. 2026-08-20

    Read third time and amended.

  9. 2026-08-20

    Ordered to third reading.

  10. 2026-08-17

    Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  11. 2026-08-13

    Assembly Rule 63 suspended.

  12. 2026-08-13

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

  13. 2026-08-13

    Read second time and amended. Ordered to second reading.

  14. 2026-08-05

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

  15. 2026-07-02

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

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

  16. 2026-07-01

    From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 1.) (June 30).

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

  17. 2026-06-23

    June 23 set for first hearing canceled at the request of author.

  18. 2026-06-04

    Referred to Com. on PUB. S.

    referral-committee

  19. 2026-05-27

    In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.

    reading-1

  20. 2026-05-27

    Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 21. Noes 13. Page 4490.) Ordered to the Assembly.

    passage,reading-1,reading-3

  21. 2026-05-14

    From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 5. Noes 2. Page 4265.) (May 14).

    committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable

  22. 2026-05-14

    Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

    reading-1,reading-2,reading-3

  23. 2026-05-08

    Set for hearing May 14.

  24. 2026-04-20

    April 20 hearing: Placed on APPR. suspense file.

  25. 2026-04-10

    Set for hearing April 20.

  26. 2026-04-08

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

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

  27. 2026-04-07

    From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 5. Noes 1. Page 3759.) (April 7).

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

  28. 2026-03-24

    Set for hearing April 7.

  29. 2026-03-23

    March 24 hearing postponed by committee.

  30. 2026-03-16

    From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on PUB. S.

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

  31. 2026-03-10

    Set for hearing March 24.

  32. 2026-02-26

    Referred to Com. on PUB. S.

    referral-committee

  33. 2026-02-17

    From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 16.

  34. 2026-02-13

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

    introduction,reading-1,referral-committee

Versions

  • 02/13/26 - Introduced — 2026-02-13Compare
  • 03/16/26 - Amended Senate — 2026-03-16Compare
  • 04/08/26 - Amended Senate — 2026-04-08Compare
  • 07/02/26 - Amended Assembly — 2026-07-02Compare
  • 08/13/26 - Amended Assembly — 2026-08-13Compare
  • 08/20/26 - Amended Assembly — 2026-08-20Compare
  • 08/30/26 - Enrolled — 2026-08-30Compare
  • (document, no version)Compare
  • SB1105Compare

Documents

Votes

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

    2026-04-07 · pass · 5-1

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

  • Placed on suspense file

    2026-04-20 · pass · 7-0

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

  • Do pass

    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 SB1105 Pérez et al.

    2026-05-27 · pass · 21-13

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

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

    2026-06-30 · pass · 6-1

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

Related bills

No related bills recorded for this bill.

Official source

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260SB1105

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 1105. 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.