CA SB 7
vetoedEmployment: automated decision systems.
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 7 pass?
No. CA SB 7 passed the legislature but was vetoed. Latest recorded action (2026-03-02): Veto sustained.
What is CA SB 7 about?
Existing law requires the Department of Technology to conduct, in coordination with other interagency bodies as it deems appropriate, a comprehensive inventory of all high-risk automated decision systems (ADS) that have been proposed for use, development, or procurement by, or are being used, developed, or procured by, any state agency. Existing law establishes the Labor and Workforce Development Agency, which is composed of various departments responsible for protecting and promoting the rights and interests of workers in California, including the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, led by the Labor Commissioner, within the Department of Industrial Relations. This bill would require an employer to provide a written notice that an ADS, for the purpose of making employment-related decisions, not including hiring, is in use at the workplace to all workers that will foreseeably be directly affected by the ADS, as specified. The bill would require the employer to maintain an updated list of all ADS currently in use. The bill would require an employer to notify, as provided, a job applicant that the employer utilizes an ADS when making hiring decisions, if the employer will use the ADS in making decisions for that position. The bill would prohibit an employer from using an ADS that does certain functions and would limit the purposes and manner in which an ADS may be used to make decisions. The bill would authorize a worker to request, and require an employer to provide, a copy of the most recent 12 months of the worker's own data primarily used by an ADS to make a discipline, termination, or deactivation decision, as specified. The bill would require an employer that primarily relied on an ADS to make a discipline, termination, or deactivation decision to provide the affected worker with a written notice, as specified. This bill would prohibit an employer from discharging, threatening to discharge, demoting, suspending, or in any manner discriminating or retaliating against any worker for taking certain actions asserting their rights under the bill. The bill would require the Labor Commissioner to enforce the bill's provisions, as specified, and would authorize a public prosecutor to bring a civil action. The bill would set forth specified types of relief that a plaintiff may seek and specified penalties that an employer that violates these provisions is subject to, including a $500 civil penalty. The bill would also provide that an employer who complies with the requirements related to notice in this bill is not required to comply with any substantially similar provisions under any other state law, except as specified. The bill would not apply to parties covered by a valid collective bargaining agreement if the agreement contains specified information, including an explicit waiver of the bill's provisions. The bill would declare that its provisions do not prohibit any employer from complying with regulatory or contractual requirements in the provision of products or services to the federal government, as defined. This bill would declare that its provisions are severable.
Who sponsors CA SB 7?
McNerney is the primary sponsor of CA SB 7, joined by 2 cosponsors.
Description
Existing law requires the Department of Technology to conduct, in coordination with other interagency bodies as it deems appropriate, a comprehensive inventory of all high-risk automated decision systems (ADS) that have been proposed for use, development, or procurement by, or are being used, developed, or procured by, any state agency. Existing law establishes the Labor and Workforce Development Agency, which is composed of various departments responsible for protecting and promoting the rights and interests of workers in California, including the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, led by the Labor Commissioner, within the Department of Industrial Relations. This bill would require an employer to provide a written notice that an ADS, for the purpose of making employment-related decisions, not including hiring, is in use at the workplace to all workers that will foreseeably be directly affected by the ADS, as specified. The bill would require the employer to maintain an updated list of all ADS currently in use. The bill would require an employer to notify, as provided, a job applicant that the employer utilizes an ADS when making hiring decisions, if the employer will use the ADS in making decisions for that position. The bill would prohibit an employer from using an ADS that does certain functions and would limit the purposes and manner in which an ADS may be used to make decisions. The bill would authorize a worker to request, and require an employer to provide, a copy of the most recent 12 months of the worker's own data primarily used by an ADS to make a discipline, termination, or deactivation decision, as specified. The bill would require an employer that primarily relied on an ADS to make a discipline, termination, or deactivation decision to provide the affected worker with a written notice, as specified. This bill would prohibit an employer from discharging, threatening to discharge, demoting, suspending, or in any manner discriminating or retaliating against any worker for taking certain actions asserting their rights under the bill. The bill would require the Labor Commissioner to enforce the bill's provisions, as specified, and would authorize a public prosecutor to bring a civil action. The bill would set forth specified types of relief that a plaintiff may seek and specified penalties that an employer that violates these provisions is subject to, including a $500 civil penalty. The bill would also provide that an employer who complies with the requirements related to notice in this bill is not required to comply with any substantially similar provisions under any other state law, except as specified. The bill would not apply to parties covered by a valid collective bargaining agreement if the agreement contains specified information, including an explicit waiver of the bill's provisions. The bill would declare that its provisions do not prohibit any employer from complying with regulatory or contractual requirements in the provision of products or services to the federal government, as defined. This bill would declare that its provisions are severable.
- Introduced
- 2024-12-02
- Latest action
- 2026-03-02 — Veto sustained.
- Bill type
- bill
- Last updated
- —
Subjects
Sponsors
- McNerneyauthor
- Bryancoauthor
- Elhawarycoauthor
Committees
Not provided by source.
Action timeline
Newest first
2026-03-02
Veto sustained.
2026-03-02
Stricken from file.
2025-10-13
In Senate. Consideration of Governor's veto pending.
2025-10-13
Vetoed by the Governor.
executive-veto
2025-09-23
Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 2 p.m.
executive-receipt
2025-09-12
Assembly amendments concurred in. (Ayes 28. Noes 9. Page 2988.) Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.
amendment-passage,committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable
2025-09-12
In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.
2025-09-11
Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 45. Noes 17. Page 3338.) Ordered to the Senate.
passage,reading-1,reading-3
2025-09-05
Assembly Rule 69(b)(1) suspended.
2025-09-05
Read third time and amended.
amendment-passage,reading-1,reading-3
2025-09-05
Ordered to third reading.
reading-1,reading-3
2025-09-03
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
reading-1,reading-2,reading-3
2025-09-02
Read second time and amended. Ordered to second reading.
amendment-passage,reading-1,reading-2
2025-08-29
From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 10. Noes 4.) (August 29).
amendment-passage,committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable
2025-08-20
August 20 set for first hearing. Placed on APPR. suspense file.
2025-07-17
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 9. Noes 4.) (July 16). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee
2025-07-09
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on P. & C.P.
amendment-passage,committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee
2025-07-09
July 8 hearing postponed by committee.
2025-06-26
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on P. & C.P. (Ayes 5. Noes 0.) (June 25). Re-referred to Com. on P. & C.P.
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee
2025-06-19
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on L. & E.
amendment-passage,committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee
2025-06-09
Referred to Coms. on L. & E., P. & C.P., and JUD.
referral-committee
2025-06-03
In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.
reading-1
2025-06-02
Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 27. Noes 10. Page 1388.) Ordered to the Assembly.
passage,reading-1,reading-3
2025-05-23
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
reading-1,reading-2,reading-3
2025-05-23
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 5. Noes 1. Page 1187.) (May 23).
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable
2025-05-20
Set for hearing May 23.
2025-05-19
May 19 hearing: Placed on APPR. suspense file.
2025-05-09
Set for hearing May 19.
2025-05-01
Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
amendment-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee
2025-04-30
From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 11. Noes 2. Page 937.) (April 29).
amendment-passage,committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee
2025-04-10
Set for hearing April 29.
2025-04-09
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on JUD. (Ayes 4. Noes 1. Page 739.) (April 9). Re-referred to Com. on JUD.
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee
2025-03-26
Set for hearing April 9.
2025-03-19
Re-referred to Coms. on L., P.E. & R. and JUD.
referral-committee
2025-03-06
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on RLS.
amendment-passage,committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee
2025-01-29
Referred to Com. on RLS.
referral-committee
2024-12-03
From printer. May be acted upon on or after January 2.
2024-12-02
Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
introduction,reading-1,referral-committee
Versions
- 12/02/24 - Introduced — 2024-12-02Compare
- 03/06/25 - Amended Senate — 2025-03-06Compare
- 05/01/25 - Amended Senate — 2025-05-01Compare
- 06/19/25 - Amended Assembly — 2025-06-19Compare
- 07/09/25 - Amended Assembly — 2025-07-09Compare
- 09/02/25 - Amended Assembly — 2025-09-02Compare
- 09/05/25 - Amended Assembly — 2025-09-05Compare
- 09/17/25 - Enrolled — 2025-09-17Compare
- SB7Compare
- (document, no version)Compare
Documents
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- 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)
- 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, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Judiciary]
2025-04-09 · pass · 4-1
Member-level votes (5)
- Smallwood-Cuevas: yes
- Laird: yes
- Durazo: yes
- Cortese: yes
- Strickland: no
Do pass as amended, but first amend, and re-refer to the Committee on [Appropriations]
2025-04-29 · pass · 11-2
Member-level votes (13)
- Arreguín: yes
- Allen: yes
- Durazo: yes
- Laird: yes
- Wahab: yes
- Stern: yes
- Caballero: yes
- Weber Pierson: yes
- Ashby: yes
- Umberg: yes
- Wiener: yes
- Valladares: no
- Niello: no
Placed on suspense file
2025-05-19 · pass · 5-0
Member-level votes (7)
- Wahab: yes
- Grayson: yes
- Caballero: yes
- Seyarto: yes
- Richardson: yes
- Cabaldon: other
- Dahle: other
Do pass
2025-05-23 · pass · 5-1
Member-level votes (7)
- Caballero: yes
- Wahab: yes
- Cabaldon: yes
- Richardson: yes
- Grayson: yes
- Seyarto: no
- Dahle: other
3rd Reading SB7 McNerney et al.
2025-06-02 · pass · 27-10
Member-level votes (40)
- Menjivar: yes
- Pérez: yes
- Rubio: yes
- Padilla: yes
- Cervantes: yes
- Wahab: yes
- Smallwood-Cuevas: yes
- Wiener: yes
- Grayson: yes
- Cortese: yes
- Ashby: yes
- Gonzalez: yes
- Arreguín: yes
- Archuleta: yes
- Umberg: yes
- Laird: yes
- Durazo: yes
- McGuire: yes
- Blakespear: yes
- McNerney: yes
- Limón: yes
- Allen: yes
- Caballero: yes
- Stern: yes
- Weber Pierson: yes
- Cabaldon: yes
- Richardson: yes
- Ochoa Bogh: no
- Niello: no
- Seyarto: no
- Valladares: no
- Alvarado-Gil: no
- Grove: no
- Dahle: no
- Strickland: no
- Choi: no
- Jones: no
- Becker: other
- Hurtado: other
- Reyes: other
Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on [Privacy and Consumer Protection]
2025-06-25 · pass · 5-0
Member-level votes (7)
- Ward: yes
- Elhawary: yes
- Lee: yes
- Kalra: yes
- Ortega: yes
- Chen: other
- Flora: other
Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]
2025-07-16 · pass · 9-4
Member-level votes (15)
- Bryan: yes
- Wicks: yes
- Irwin: yes
- Pellerin: yes
- Lowenthal: yes
- Ward: yes
- Bauer-Kahan: yes
- Ortega: yes
- McKinnor: yes
- Macedo: no
- Patterson: no
- DeMaio: no
- Dixon: no
- Wilson: other
- Petrie-Norris: other
Do pass as amended.
2025-08-29 · pass · 10-4
Member-level votes (15)
- Elhawary: yes
- Pellerin: yes
- Fong: yes
- Calderon: yes
- Arambula: yes
- Mark González: yes
- Wicks: yes
- Caloza: yes
- Ahrens: yes
- Solache: yes
- Sanchez: no
- Ta: no
- Tangipa: no
- Dixon: no
- Pacheco: other
SB 7 McNerney Senate Third Reading By Ward
2025-09-12 · pass · 45-17
Member-level votes (80)
- Mark González: yes
- Gipson: yes
- Rogers: yes
- Addis: yes
- Ward: yes
- Haney: yes
- Hart: yes
- Fong: yes
- Elhawary: yes
- Calderon: yes
- Carrillo: yes
- Bains: yes
- Ransom: yes
- Berman: yes
- Wicks: yes
- Celeste Rodriguez: yes
- Arambula: yes
- Connolly: yes
- Schultz: yes
- Bauer-Kahan: yes
- Bennett: yes
- Papan: yes
- Schiavo: yes
- Bonta: yes
- Aguiar-Curry: yes
- Boerner: yes
- Alvarez: yes
- Lee: yes
- Stefani: yes
- Caloza: yes
- Sharp-Collins: yes
- Ortega: yes
- Solache: yes
- Lowenthal: yes
- Bryan: yes
- Gabriel: yes
- Zbur: yes
- McKinnor: yes
- Pellerin: yes
- Muratsuchi: yes
- Krell: yes
- Patel: yes
- Kalra: yes
- Rivas: yes
- Garcia: yes
- Johnson: no
- Dixon: no
- Hoover: no
- Hadwick: no
- Tangipa: no
- Lackey: no
- Ávila Farías: no
- Macedo: no
- Gallagher: no
- Jeff Gonzalez: no
- Sanchez: no
- Ta: no
- Ellis: no
- Alanis: no
- Wallis: no
- Patterson: no
- DeMaio: no
- Ahrens: other
- Michelle Rodriguez: other
- Quirk-Silva: other
- Valencia: other
- Nguyen: other
- Irwin: other
- Wilson: other
- Ramos: other
- Blanca Rubio: other
- Jackson: other
- Petrie-Norris: other
- Pacheco: other
- Harabedian: other
- Chen: other
- Castillo: other
- Davies: other
- Flora: other
- Soria: other
Unfinished Business SB7 McNerney et al. Concurrence
2025-09-12 · pass · 28-9
Member-level votes (40)
- McGuire: yes
- Becker: yes
- Caballero: yes
- Weber Pierson: yes
- McNerney: yes
- Grayson: yes
- Umberg: yes
- Pérez: yes
- Padilla: yes
- Cervantes: yes
- Menjivar: yes
- Wiener: yes
- Wahab: yes
- Laird: yes
- Stern: yes
- Rubio: yes
- Richardson: yes
- Hurtado: yes
- Reyes: yes
- Blakespear: yes
- Arreguín: yes
- Ashby: yes
- Allen: yes
- Smallwood-Cuevas: yes
- Durazo: yes
- Archuleta: yes
- Limón: yes
- Cortese: yes
- Strickland: no
- Seyarto: no
- Niello: no
- Valladares: no
- Jones: no
- Ochoa Bogh: no
- Grove: no
- Dahle: no
- Alvarado-Gil: no
- Choi: other
- Cabaldon: other
- Gonzalez: other
Related bills
No related bills recorded for this bill.
Official source
Attribution
Data from openstates_api_sync, retrieved 2026-10-29T00:26:32.517700Z
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 7. 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.