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