Bill Commons

CA SB 320

dead

Firearms: California Do Not Sell List.

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 320 pass?

No. CA SB 320 did not pass — it was defeated or died in the legislative process. Latest recorded action (2026-02-02): Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 56.

What is CA SB 320 about?

Existing law makes possession of a firearm by certain classes of persons, including a convicted felon, a person convicted of specified misdemeanors, a person that has been found mentally incompetent to stand trial, a person that has been found not guilty of specified crimes by reason of insanity, or a person that has been placed under conservatorship, a crime. Existing law additionally makes it a crime to sell or give possession of a firearm to these classes of persons prohibited from owning a firearm. Existing law generally makes a violation of the Penal Code a misdemeanor. Existing law requires the Department of Justice, upon submission of firearm purchaser information by a licensed firearm dealer, to examine its records to determine whether a potential firearm purchaser is prohibited by state or federal law from possessing, receiving, owning, or purchasing a firearm. This bill would, by November 1, 2027, require the Department of Justice to develop a process to allow a person who resides in California to voluntarily add their own name to, and subsequently remove their own name from, the California Do Not Sell List, with the purpose of preventing a person who has voluntarily registered on the list from passing a firearms eligibility check to purchase or acquire a firearm from a firearms dealer or through a private-party transaction while they are on the list. The bill would allow a person to add their name to the list by submitting specified information to a sheriff or municipal police department, and would require that sheriff or municipal police department to verify the information and send it to the Department of Justice. By imposing additional duties on local law enforcement, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would allow a person, after a specified period of time, to request removal from the list. The bill would require all information provided pursuant to these provisions be kept confidential, require this information be kept separate and apart from all other records maintained by the department, and require this information to be used only for the purposes described above. The bill would prohibit requiring a person to place themselves on the Do Not Sell List as a condition of employment or of receiving any benefits or services. By creating a new prohibition, this bill would create a new crime and therefore impose a state-mandated local program. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. 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 with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Who sponsors CA SB 320?

Limón is the primary sponsor of CA SB 320, joined by 1 cosponsor.

Description

Existing law makes possession of a firearm by certain classes of persons, including a convicted felon, a person convicted of specified misdemeanors, a person that has been found mentally incompetent to stand trial, a person that has been found not guilty of specified crimes by reason of insanity, or a person that has been placed under conservatorship, a crime. Existing law additionally makes it a crime to sell or give possession of a firearm to these classes of persons prohibited from owning a firearm. Existing law generally makes a violation of the Penal Code a misdemeanor. Existing law requires the Department of Justice, upon submission of firearm purchaser information by a licensed firearm dealer, to examine its records to determine whether a potential firearm purchaser is prohibited by state or federal law from possessing, receiving, owning, or purchasing a firearm. This bill would, by November 1, 2027, require the Department of Justice to develop a process to allow a person who resides in California to voluntarily add their own name to, and subsequently remove their own name from, the California Do Not Sell List, with the purpose of preventing a person who has voluntarily registered on the list from passing a firearms eligibility check to purchase or acquire a firearm from a firearms dealer or through a private-party transaction while they are on the list. The bill would allow a person to add their name to the list by submitting specified information to a sheriff or municipal police department, and would require that sheriff or municipal police department to verify the information and send it to the Department of Justice. By imposing additional duties on local law enforcement, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would allow a person, after a specified period of time, to request removal from the list. The bill would require all information provided pursuant to these provisions be kept confidential, require this information be kept separate and apart from all other records maintained by the department, and require this information to be used only for the purposes described above. The bill would prohibit requiring a person to place themselves on the Do Not Sell List as a condition of employment or of receiving any benefits or services. By creating a new prohibition, this bill would create a new crime and therefore impose a state-mandated local program. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. 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 with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Introduced
2025-02-11
Latest action
2026-02-02 — Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 56.
Bill type
bill
Last updated
—

Subjects

Sponsors

  • Limónauthor
  • Weber Piersoncoauthor

Committees

Not provided by source.

Action timeline

Newest first

  1. 2026-02-02

    Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 56.

    failure

  2. 2025-05-23

    May 23 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.

  3. 2025-05-16

    Set for hearing May 23.

  4. 2025-05-05

    May 5 hearing: Placed on APPR. suspense file.

  5. 2025-04-25

    Set for hearing May 5.

  6. 2025-04-23

    From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 11. Noes 2. Page 834.) (April 22). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

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

  7. 2025-04-09

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

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

  8. 2025-04-03

    Set for hearing April 22.

  9. 2025-03-28

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

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

  10. 2025-03-27

    From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on JUD. (Ayes 5. Noes 1. Page 533.) (March 25).

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

  11. 2025-03-17

    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

  12. 2025-03-07

    Set for hearing March 25.

  13. 2025-02-19

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

    referral-committee

  14. 2025-02-12

    From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 14.

  15. 2025-02-11

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

    introduction,reading-1,referral-committee

Versions

  • 02/11/25 - Introduced — 2025-02-11Compare
  • 03/17/25 - Amended Senate — 2025-03-17Compare
  • 03/28/25 - Amended Senate — 2025-03-28Compare
  • 04/09/25 - Amended Senate — 2025-04-09Compare
  • SB320Compare
  • (document, no version)Compare

Documents

Votes

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

    2025-03-25 · pass · 5-1

    Member-level votes (6)
    • Arreguín: yes
    • Caballero: yes
    • Pérez: yes
    • Gonzalez: yes
    • Wiener: yes
    • Seyarto: no
  • Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]

    2025-04-22 · pass · 11-2

    Member-level votes (13)
    • Allen: yes
    • Wahab: yes
    • Durazo: yes
    • Umberg: yes
    • Caballero: yes
    • Laird: yes
    • Arreguín: yes
    • Stern: yes
    • Weber Pierson: yes
    • Ashby: yes
    • Wiener: yes
    • Valladares: no
    • Niello: no
  • Placed on suspense file

    2025-05-05 · pass · 7-0

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

Related bills

No related bills recorded for this bill.

Official source

Attribution

Data from openstates_api_sync, retrieved 2026-10-30T02:16:52.460892Z

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=SB 320. 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.