BILL ANALYSIS Ó AB 1024 Page 1 CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS AB 1024 (Gonzalez) As Amended September 6, 2013 Majority vote ----------------------------------------------------------------- |ASSEMBLY: | |(May 16, 2013) |SENATE: |29-5 |(September 11, | | | | | | |2013) | ----------------------------------------------------------------- (vote not relevant) Original Committee Reference: H. & C.D. SUMMARY : Provides that upon certification by the examining committee that an applicant who is not lawfully present in the United States has fulfilled the requirements for admission to practice law, the Supreme Court may admit that applicant as an attorney at law in all the courts of this state and may direct an order to be entered upon its records to that effect. The Senate amendments delete the Assembly version of this bill, and instead substitute the current provisions of the bill. FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8, negligible state costs. COMMENTS : The federal Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA), Pub. L. No. 104-193, 110 Stat. 2105 (Aug. 22, 1996) prohibits certain categories of individuals not lawfully present in the United States from receiving certain public benefits, including "any grant, contract, loan, professional license, or commercial license provided by an agency of a State or local government or by appropriated funds of a State or local government." (8 United States Code (U.S.C.) Section 1621(c).) PRWORA provides that a state may render "an alien who is not lawfully present in the United States . . . eligible for any State or local public benefit for which such alien would otherwise be ineligible . . . through the enactment of a State law after the date of the enactment of this Act which affirmatively provides for such eligibility." (8 U.S.C. Section 1621(d).) Consistent with that provision, this bill seeks to expressly extend eligibility to obtain a license to practice law to individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States. AB 1024 Page 2 The Supreme Court is currently considering and has not rendered a decision whether Sergio Garcia is eligible for admission to practice law in the State of California. (See In re Sergio C. Garcia on Admission, S202512, May 15, 2012.) Mr. Garcia has reportedly been unlawfully present in the United States for approximately 20 years, and is currently petitioning the federal government for an immigrant visa. During his time in the United States, Mr. Garcia has graduated from law school, passed the California Bar Exam, and has been found by the Committee of Bar Examiners to have met all the necessary requirements for admission to practice law in the State of California. However, given his immigration status, it may be uncertain whether the Supreme Court can admit Mr. Garcia consistently with federal law. Indeed, the U.S. Department of Justice has filed an amicus brief in the Garcia case opining that 8 U.S.C. Section 1621 precludes issuance of a law license to Mr. Garcia, but also noting that federal law allows California to enact a law making undocumented immigrants eligible for this public benefit. Although some have argued that existing law should be sufficient, this bill seeks to clarify the question by expressly providing that the Supreme Court may admit an applicant who is not lawfully present in the United States as an attorney at law in all the courts of this state upon certification by the State Bar examining committee that the applicant has fulfilled the requirements for admission to practice law. Analysis Prepared by : Kevin Baker / JUD. / (916) 319-2334 FN: 0002797