BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  AB 351
                                                                  Page  1


          ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
          AB 351 (Donnelly)
          As Amended  May 24, 2013
          Majority vote 

           PUBLIC SAFETY       6-0         APPROPRIATIONS      14-0        
           
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Ayes:|Ammiano, Melendez,        |Ayes:|Gatto, Bocanegra,         |
          |     |Jones-Sawyer, Mitchell,   |     |Bradford,                 |
          |     |Quirk, Skinner            |     |Ian Calderon, Campos,     |
          |     |                          |     |Donnelly, Eggman, Gomez,  |
          |     |                          |     |Hall, Ammiano, Linder,    |
          |     |                          |     |Pan, Quirk, Weber         |
          |     |                          |     |                          |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           SUMMARY  :  Prohibits state agencies, political subdivision,  
          employees, and members of the California National Guard  
          officials from knowingly aiding an agency of the Armed Forces of  
          the United States in enforcing specified federal laws if the  
          agency, political subdivision, employee, or National Guard  
          member would violate the United States or California  
          Constitutions or any state law by providing that aid.   
          Specifically,  this bill  :  

          1)Provides that, notwithstanding any provision of law to the  
            contrary, no state political subdivision, no state agency, and  
            no state employee acting in his or her official capacity, and  
            no member of the California National Guard on official state  
            duty, shall knowingly aid an agency of the U.S. Armed Forces  
            in any investigation, prosecution, or detention of a person  
            within California pursuant to Sections 1021 and 1022 of the  
            National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year (FY) 2012  
            (NDAA), or the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military  
            Force (Public Law 107-40), or any other federal law, if the  
            state agency, political subdivision, employee, or National  
            Guard member would violate the United States Constitution, the  
            California Constitution, or any law of this state by providing  
            that aid.

          2)Exempts participation by state or local law enforcement or the  
            California National Guard in a joint task force, partnership,  
            or other similar cooperative agreement with federal law  
            enforcement if that task force, partnership or cooperative  








                                                                  AB 351
                                                                  Page  2


            agreement is not for the purpose of investigating,  
            prosecuting, or detaining any person under Sections 1021 and  
            1022 of the NDAA for FY 2012, Public Law 107-40, or any other  
            federal law, if the state agency, political subdivision,  
            employee, or California National Guard member would violate  
            the United States Constitution, the California Constitution,  
            or any law of this state by providing that aid.

          3)States that the policy of California is to refuse to provide  
            material support for or to participate in any way with the  
            implementation within this state of any federal law that  
            purports to authorize indefinite detention of any person  
            within California.

          4)Specifies that, notwithstanding any other law, no local law  
            enforcement agency, local or municipal government, or its  
            employees acting under official capacity shall knowingly use  
            state funds or funds allocated by the state to local entities  
            on or after January 1, 2013, to engage in any activity that  
            aids an agency of the U.S. Armed Forces in the detention of  
            any person within California for purposes of implementing  
            Sections 1021 and 1022 of the NDAA for FY 2012, or Public Law  
            107-40, if that activity would violate the United States  
            Constitution, the California Constitution, or any law of this  
            state.

           EXISTING LAW  : 

          1)Affirms that the authority of the President to use all  
            necessary and appropriate force pursuant to the Authorization  
            for Use of Military Force including the authority for the U.S.  
            Armed Forces to detain specified persons pending disposition  
            under the law of war.  

          2)Requires indefinite military detention without charge or trial  
            of specified persons captured in the course of hostilities.  

          3)Provides that the Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall  
            not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or  
            Invasion the public Safety may require it.  

          4)Provides that laws of the United States are the supreme law of  
            the land provided that they are made in pursuance of the  
            powers delegated to the federal government in the  








                                                                  AB 351
                                                                  Page  3


            Constitution.  

          5)Provides that "Congress shall make no law ? abridging ? the  
            right of the people ? to petition the government for a redress  
            of grievances."  

          6)Protects the People from unreasonable searches and seizures.  

          7)Provides that the people have a right to be free from  
            deprivation of life, liberty, or property, without due process  
            of law. 

          8)Provides that the people have a right in criminal prosecutions  
            to enjoy a speedy trial by an impartial jury, as well as the  
            right to be informed of the nature and cause of the  
            accusation, to confront witnesses, and to counsel.  

          9)Prohibits excessive bail, fines, or cruel and unusual  
            punishment.  

          10)Provides that all "powers not delegated to the United States  
            by the Constitution" are reserved to the states.  

           FISCAL EFFECT  :  According to the Assembly Appropriations  
          Committee, costs are likely to be minor, as prohibiting a person  
          or entity from knowingly aiding U.S. Armed Forces in an  
          unconstitutional act is likely to be a rare occurrence, and is  
          unlikely to present the federal government with sufficient cause  
          to withdraw federal funds.
           
          COMMENTS  :  According to the author, "Indefinite detention, by  
          its very nature, discards many of the ideals that our founding  
          fathers enshrined in the Constitution.  These include but are  
          not limited to:  the right to a speedy trial by an impartial  
          jury; the right to due process; the protection against  
          unreasonable seizures; the protection against cruel and unusual  
          punishment; the privilege of writ of habeas corpus; the right to  
          petition the government for grievances; and the right to be  
          informed of the nature and cause of accusations and charges.   
          Clearly indefinite detention is unconstitutional and it is our  
          duty, as citizens of our nation, to correct this flagrant  
          violation of our rights and liberties.  Although this horrific  
          abuse of liberty has occurred in our nation's history once  
          before in the internment of Japanese-American citizens, we must  








                                                                  AB 351
                                                                  Page  4


          take a stand now to never allow this to happen again.

          "California is not the first state to look at enacting policy to  
          circumvent Section 1021 of H.R 1540 (2011).  The Michigan State  
          Senate passed SB 94 on March 6th, 2013.  SB 94 prohibits all  
          Michigan state agencies and employees, including the Michigan  
          National Guard, from aiding any federal agency if that aid  
          'would place that state agency, political subdivision, employee,  
          or member of the Michigan National Guard in violation of the  
          United States Constitution . . . .'

          "In California, in addition to the cities of Berkeley, Fairfax  
          and Santa Cruz, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, on  
          February 26, 2013, passed 'a resolution opposing the indefinite  
          detention provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act,  
          instructing public agencies to decline requests by Federal  
          agencies acting under detention powers, urging law enforcement  
          officials to allow detainees to due process . . . . ' "

          Please see the policy committee analysis for a full discussion  
          of this bill.  


          Analysis Prepared by  :    Sandy Uribe / PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744 


                                                                FN: 0000885