BILL ANALYSIS SB 188 Page 1 Date of Hearing: June 30, 2009 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY Mike Feuer, Chair SB 188 (Runner) - As Amended: June 24, 2009 PROPOSED CONSENT (As Proposed to be Amended) SENATE VOTE : 39-0 SUBJECT : TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDERS: SCHOOLS KEY ISSUE : SHOULD CERTAIN EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS BE AUTHORIZED TO SEEK A RESTRAINING ORDER ON BEHALF OF A STUDENT WHO IS THE SUBJECT OF SPECIFIED THREATS OF VIOLENCE REASONABLY CONSTRUED TO BE CARRIED OUT ON SCHOOL PROPERTY? FISCAL EFFECT : As currently in print this bill is keyed fiscal. SYNOPSIS This bill responds to an incident in the author's district where a student who was making threats to other students and staff members proceeded to attack one of her classmates with a set of keys, inflicting a serious head injury. In response to this incident, the administrators of Western Beauty Institute asked the court for a restraining order but discovered that their institution is not covered by current law in such a way as to permit a general restraining order to protect all individuals on a campus at any given time. As proposed to be amended, the bill has no opposition. SUMMARY : Permits specified educational institutions to seek a restraining order on behalf of a student, as specified. Specifically, this bill : 1)Authorizes a designated officer of postsecondary educational institution, a student of which has suffered a specified threat of violence from any individual which can be reasonably construed to be carried out at the campus or facility, to seek a temporary restraining order and an injunction, on behalf of the student and, at the court's discretion, any number of other students at the campus or facility. 2)Provides that a temporary restraining order may be granted ex SB 188 Page 2 parte, at the court's discretion, for up to 15 days, upon the plaintiff filing a petition for an injunction and an affidavit that shows reasonable proof that a student has suffered a credible threat of violence by the defendant, and that great or irreparable harm would result to the student. 3)Requires the court, within 15 days of the filing of the petition, to hold a hearing on the petition for the injunction, where the defendant may file a response or file a cross-complaint. 4)Provides that if the defendant is a current student of the entity requesting the injunction, the judge shall receive evidence concerning the decision of the postsecondary educational institution decision to retain, terminate, or otherwise discipline the defendant. 5)Provides that if the judge finds by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant made a credible threat of violence, an injunction shall be issued prohibiting further threats of violence with a duration of not more than three years. 6)Provides that any intentional and knowing violation of the temporary restraining order is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not more than $1000, or by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one year, or both. EXISTING LAW : 1)Authorizes any employer, whose employee has suffered unlawful violence or a credible threat of violence from any individual, to seek a temporary restraining order and an injunction on behalf of the employee and, at the discretion of the court, any number of other employees at the workplace, and, if appropriate, other employees at other workplaces of the employer. (Code of Civil Procedure 527.8.) 2)Authorizes individuals to seek restraining orders and protective orders to enjoin acts of domestic violence (Family Code Sections 6320, 6321, & 6322), elder abuse (Welfare & Institutions Code Section 15657.03), and civil harassment (Code of Civil Procedure Section 527.6), among others. 3)Provides that any intentional and knowing violation of SB 188 Page 3 specified protective orders (including those listed above) is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not more than $1000, or by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one year, or both. (Penal Code Section 273.6.) 4)Provides that every student or employee who has been suspended or dismissed for disrupting the orderly operation of the campus or facility, and as a condition of the suspension or dismissal has been denied access to the campus or facility, willfully and knowingly enters the campus or facility is guilty of a misdemeanor. (Penal Code Section 626.2.) 5)Authorizes the chief administrative officer of a school, as defined, to notify a person that consent to remain on the school campus or facility has been withdrawn whenever there is reasonable cause to believe that such person has willfully disrupted the orderly operation of the campus or facility. (Penal Code Section 626.4(a).) 6)Provides that a person who willfully and knowingly enters or remains on the school campus or in the school facility during the period for which consent has been withdrawn is guilty of a misdemeanor. (Penal Code Section 626.4(d).) 7)Authorizes the chief administrative official of a school to direct a person who is interfering with the peaceful conduct of the activities of the campus or facility to leave the premises. Further provides that if that person fails to do so or willfully and knowingly re-enters the campus or facility within seven days, he or she is guilty of a misdemeanor. (Penal Code Sections 626.6 & 626.7.) 8)Provides that any person who comes into any school building or near any school ground without lawful business, and whose presence or acts interfere with the peaceful conduct of the activities of the school, is guilty of a misdemeanor if the person remains after being asked to leave, reenters within seven days, or has otherwise established a continued pattern of unauthorized entry. (Penal Code Section 626.8.) 9)Provides that every person who, by physical force and with the intent to prevent attendance or instruction, willfully obstructs or attempts to obstruct any student or teacher seeking to attend or instruct classes at any of the campuses or facilities of the University of California, California SB 188 Page 4 State University, or a community college district shall be punished by a fine of up to $500, by imprisonment in a county jail for up to one year, or both. (Penal Code Section 602.10.) COMMENTS : The author relates that the idea for this bill arises from an incident that occurred at an adult beauty institute in Lancaster, California. According to the author, the Western Beauty Institute (WBI) expelled a student who was making threats to other students and staff members. After being expelled, the student proceeded to attack one of her classmates with a set of keys, inflicting a serious head injury. In response to this incident, the administrators of WBI asked the court for a restraining order but discovered that educational facilities are not covered by current law. Therefore, there is currently no mechanism to issue a blanket restraining order to protect all individuals on a campus at any given time. As proposed to be amended, the bill is appropriately limited to the private postsecondary schools whose students are the subject of off-campus threats that are understood to be carried out on campus because law enforcement officials advise that these threats are not covered by existing criminal and civil protections, and excludes minors and public schools and where serious and countervailing constitutional, educational, parental, due-process and other important legal rights and concerns are implicated. In order to avoid undue safety risks, the bill also appropriately requires the consent of the student. REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION : Support Western Beauty College (sponsor) Los Angeles Unified School District San Francisco Unified School District Opposition None on file Analysis Prepared by : Kevin G. Baker / JUD. / (916) 319-2334