CA SB 357
introducedJuveniles: delinquency.
California · 2025-2026 Regular Session · upper
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 357 pass?
Not yet. CA SB 357 has been introduced but has not advanced to a vote. Latest recorded action (2026-08-20): Ordered to inactive file on request of Assembly Member Aguiar-Curry.
What is CA SB 357 about?
Existing law subjects a minor between 12 and 17 years of age, who violates any federal, state, or local law or ordinance, and a minor under 12 years of age who is alleged to have committed specified serious offenses, to the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which may adjudge the minor to be a ward of the court. Existing law also establishes the transition jurisdiction or the juvenile court and subjects certain minors who are older than 17 years and 5 months of age and younger than 18 years of age, and certain nonminors who are older than 18 years of age and less than 21 years of age, who were wards of the juvenile court and in foster care placement to that jurisdiction. Existing law assigns various responsibilities relating to these individuals to the probation officer, including, among others, the responsibility to supervise minors placed on probation. Existing law requires every county to appoint a chief probation officer and requires the chief probation officer to perform the duties and discharge the obligations imposed on the office by law or by order of the superior court, including, among other things, community supervision of the minors described above and the operation of juvenile halls, camps, and ranches, pursuant to specified provisions. This bill would authorize the board of supervisors in a county with a population of at least 6,000,000 people to, except as specified, delegate to a county official who has jurisdiction over youth development, diversion, and reentry all or part of the duties and authorities concerning these individuals, as specified. The bill would require the county board of supervisors to delegate all or part of these duties and authorities to a county official that is part of a collective bargaining unit. Existing law generally limits access to juvenile case files, as defined. Existing law authorizes only certain individuals to inspect a juvenile case file, including, among others, the county counsel, city attorney, or any other attorney representing the petitioning agency in a dependency action. This bill would additionally authorize county officials who have been delegated duties, authorities, or both, as described above, to inspect a juvenile case file.
Who sponsors CA SB 357?
Menjivar is the primary sponsor of CA SB 357, joined by 1 cosponsor.
Description
Existing law subjects a minor between 12 and 17 years of age, who violates any federal, state, or local law or ordinance, and a minor under 12 years of age who is alleged to have committed specified serious offenses, to the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which may adjudge the minor to be a ward of the court. Existing law also establishes the transition jurisdiction or the juvenile court and subjects certain minors who are older than 17 years and 5 months of age and younger than 18 years of age, and certain nonminors who are older than 18 years of age and less than 21 years of age, who were wards of the juvenile court and in foster care placement to that jurisdiction. Existing law assigns various responsibilities relating to these individuals to the probation officer, including, among others, the responsibility to supervise minors placed on probation. Existing law requires every county to appoint a chief probation officer and requires the chief probation officer to perform the duties and discharge the obligations imposed on the office by law or by order of the superior court, including, among other things, community supervision of the minors described above and the operation of juvenile halls, camps, and ranches, pursuant to specified provisions. This bill would authorize the board of supervisors in a county with a population of at least 6,000,000 people to, except as specified, delegate to a county official who has jurisdiction over youth development, diversion, and reentry all or part of the duties and authorities concerning these individuals, as specified. The bill would require the county board of supervisors to delegate all or part of these duties and authorities to a county official that is part of a collective bargaining unit. Existing law generally limits access to juvenile case files, as defined. Existing law authorizes only certain individuals to inspect a juvenile case file, including, among others, the county counsel, city attorney, or any other attorney representing the petitioning agency in a dependency action. This bill would additionally authorize county officials who have been delegated duties, authorities, or both, as described above, to inspect a juvenile case file.
- Introduced
- 2025-02-12
- Latest action
- 2026-08-20 — Ordered to inactive file on request of Assembly Member Aguiar-Curry.
- Bill type
- bill
- Last updated
- —
Subjects
Sponsors
- Menjivarauthor
- Bryanprincipal coauthor
Committees
Not provided by source.
Action timeline
Newest first
2026-08-20
Ordered to inactive file on request of Assembly Member Aguiar-Curry.
2026-08-19
From inactive file.
2026-08-19
Ordered to third reading.
reading-1,reading-3
2026-08-18
Notice of intention to remove from inactive file given by Assembly Member Aguiar-Curry.
2025-08-18
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
reading-1,reading-2,reading-3
2025-08-18
Ordered to inactive file on request of Assembly Member Aguiar-Curry.
2025-07-17
Read second time and amended. Ordered to second reading.
amendment-passage,reading-1,reading-2
2025-07-16
From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 5. Noes 1.) (July 15).
amendment-passage,committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable
2025-07-01
July 1 set for first hearing canceled at the request of author.
2025-06-16
Referred to Com. on PUB. S.
referral-committee
2025-06-05
In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.
reading-1
2025-06-04
Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 25. Noes 6. Page 1504.) Ordered to the Assembly.
passage,reading-1,reading-3
2025-06-02
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
reading-1,reading-2,reading-3
2025-05-29
Read third time and amended.
amendment-passage,reading-1,reading-3
2025-05-29
Ordered to second reading.
reading-1,reading-2
2025-05-01
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
reading-1,reading-2,reading-3
2025-04-30
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 4. Noes 1. Page 945.) (April 29).
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable
2025-04-11
Set for hearing April 29.
2025-04-10
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
2025-02-19
Referred to Com. on PUB. S.
referral-committee
2025-02-13
From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 15.
2025-02-12
Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
introduction,reading-1,referral-committee
Versions
Documents
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- text/html
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
Votes
Do pass
2025-04-29 · pass · 4-1
Member-level votes (6)
- Arreguín: yes
- Gonzalez: yes
- Wiener: yes
- Pérez: yes
- Seyarto: no
- Caballero: other
3rd Reading SB357 Menjivar et al.
2025-06-04 · pass · 25-6
Member-level votes (40)
- Menjivar: yes
- Limón: yes
- Pérez: yes
- Padilla: yes
- Smallwood-Cuevas: yes
- Weber Pierson: yes
- Wahab: yes
- Hurtado: yes
- Grove: yes
- Wiener: yes
- Cortese: yes
- Allen: yes
- Cervantes: yes
- McGuire: yes
- Stern: yes
- Arreguín: yes
- Blakespear: yes
- McNerney: yes
- Cabaldon: yes
- Gonzalez: yes
- Grayson: yes
- Becker: yes
- Ochoa Bogh: yes
- Ashby: yes
- Laird: yes
- Jones: no
- Strickland: no
- Seyarto: no
- Alvarado-Gil: no
- Choi: no
- Niello: no
- Durazo: other
- Reyes: other
- Caballero: other
- Valladares: other
- Rubio: other
- Dahle: other
- Umberg: other
- Archuleta: other
- Richardson: other
Do pass as amended.
2025-07-15 · pass · 5-1
Member-level votes (9)
- Sharp-Collins: yes
- Haney: yes
- Harabedian: yes
- Schultz: yes
- Mark González: yes
- Alanis: no
- Ramos: other
- Lackey: other
- Nguyen: other
Related bills
No related bills recorded for this bill.
Official source
Attribution
Data from openstates_api_sync, retrieved 2026-08-21T20:59:09.963134Z
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 357. 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.