CA SB 768
deadCourts: data reporting.
California · 2025-2026 Regular Session · upper
Quick answers
Did CA SB 768 pass?
No. CA SB 768 did not pass — it was defeated or died in the legislative process (2026-02-02). Latest recorded action (2026-02-02): Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 56.
What is CA SB 768 about?
Existing law, the Sargent Shriver Civil Counsel Act, requires legal counsel to be appointed to represent low-income parties in civil matters involving critical issues affecting basic human needs in courts selected by the Judicial Council. The act requires the Judicial Council to develop one or more programs to provide competitive grants to provide legal counsel to low-income persons who require legal services in civil matters involving specific types of civil matters, including, among others, housing-related matters, probate conservatorships, guardianships, and domestic violence and civil harassment restraining orders. Existing law requires the Judicial Council to consider various factors, including, among others, the unmet need for legal services in the geographic area to be served, in selecting and renewing participating programs. Existing law requires program applicants to, among other things, describe how the program would be administered and the means by which the program would serve the particular needs of the community, such as by providing representation to limited-English-speaking clients. This bill would require courts to provide the Judicial Council each month with information regarding unlawful detainer cases, as specified, aggregated by ZIP Code. The bill would require the Judicial Council to make that information publicly available online every 4 months.
Who sponsors CA SB 768?
Durazo is the primary sponsor of CA SB 768.
Description
Existing law, the Sargent Shriver Civil Counsel Act, requires legal counsel to be appointed to represent low-income parties in civil matters involving critical issues affecting basic human needs in courts selected by the Judicial Council. The act requires the Judicial Council to develop one or more programs to provide competitive grants to provide legal counsel to low-income persons who require legal services in civil matters involving specific types of civil matters, including, among others, housing-related matters, probate conservatorships, guardianships, and domestic violence and civil harassment restraining orders. Existing law requires the Judicial Council to consider various factors, including, among others, the unmet need for legal services in the geographic area to be served, in selecting and renewing participating programs. Existing law requires program applicants to, among other things, describe how the program would be administered and the means by which the program would serve the particular needs of the community, such as by providing representation to limited-English-speaking clients. This bill would require courts to provide the Judicial Council each month with information regarding unlawful detainer cases, as specified, aggregated by ZIP Code. The bill would require the Judicial Council to make that information publicly available online every 4 months.
- Introduced
- 2025-02-21
- Latest action
- 2026-02-02 — Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 56.
- Bill type
- bill
- Last updated
- —
Subjects
Sponsors
- Durazoauthor
Committees
Not provided by source.
Action timeline
2025-02-21
Introduced. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
introduction,referral-committee
2025-02-24
Read first time.
reading-1
2025-02-24
From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 24.
2025-03-12
Referred to Com. on JUD.
referral-committee
2025-03-20
Set for hearing April 8.
2025-03-25
April 8 set for first hearing canceled at the request of author.
2025-03-25
Set for hearing April 22.
2025-04-10
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
2025-04-23
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To consent calendar. (Ayes 13. Noes 0. Page 837.) (April 22). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee
2025-04-25
Set for hearing May 5.
2025-05-05
May 5 hearing: Placed on APPR. suspense file.
2025-05-16
Set for hearing May 23.
2025-05-23
May 23 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.
2026-02-02
Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 56.
failure
Versions
Documents
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- text/html
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
Votes
Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations] with the recommendation: To Consent Calendar
2025-04-22 · pass · 13-0
Member-level votes (13)
- Allen: yes
- Wahab: yes
- Umberg: yes
- Durazo: yes
- Caballero: yes
- Laird: yes
- Arreguín: yes
- Stern: yes
- Weber Pierson: yes
- Ashby: yes
- Valladares: yes
- Niello: yes
- Wiener: yes
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_bulk_csv, retrieved 2026-07-24T01:34:27.960412Z
Inspect retained evidence for changes recorded after evidence tracking began:
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 768. 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.