BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 560|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 560
Author: Gomez (D), et al.
Amended: 6/23/15 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: 5-2, 6/16/15
AYES: Jackson, Hertzberg, Leno, Monning, Wieckowski
NOES: Moorlach, Anderson
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 54-22, 4/27/15 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT: Civil actions: immigration status
SOURCE: Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund
DIGEST: This bill specifies that the immigration status of a
minor child seeking recovery under any applicable law is
irrelevant to the issues of liability or remedy, except for
employment-related prospective injunctive relief that would
directly violate federal law. This bill generally prohibits
discovery or other inquiry in a civil action or proceeding
relating to a minor child's immigration status except as
specified. This bill further states that its provisions are
declaratory of existing law and that the express application of
this act to minors is not intended to imply that adults are not
likewise protected by existing law in the same circumstances.
ANALYSIS: Existing law provides that the Legislature finds and
declares the following:
AB 560
Page 2
1)All protections, rights, and remedies available under state
law, except any reinstatement remedy prohibited by federal
law, are available to all individuals regardless of
immigration status who have applied for employment, or who are
or who have been employed, in this state.
2)For purposes of enforcing state labor, employment, civil
rights, and employee housing laws, a person's immigration
status is irrelevant to the issue of liability, and in
proceedings or discovery undertaken to enforce those state
laws no inquiry shall be permitted into a person's immigration
status except where the person seeking to make this inquiry
has shown by clear and convincing evidence that this inquiry
is necessary in order to comply with federal immigration law.
3)These provisions are declaratory of existing law.
4)The provisions are severable. If any provision of the above
provisions or their application is held invalid, that
invalidity is prohibited from affecting other provisions or
applications that can be given effect without the invalid
provision or application.
This bill:
1)Provides that the immigration status of a minor child seeking
recovery under any applicable law is irrelevant to the issues
of liability or remedy, except for employment-related
prospective injunctive relief that would directly violate
federal law.
2)Provides that discovery or other inquiry in a civil action or
proceeding relating to a minor child's immigration status
shall not be permitted except where the minor child's claims
place the minor child's immigration status directly in
contention or the person seeking to make this inquiry has
shown by clear and convincing evidence that the inquiry is
AB 560
Page 3
necessary in order to comply with federal immigration law.
3)States that its provisions are declaratory of existing law.
4)Provides that the express application of this act to minors is
not intended to imply that adults are not likewise protected
by existing law in the same circumstances.
Background
In 2002, the United States Supreme Court, in Hoffman Plastic
Compounds Inc. v. NLRB (2002) 535 U.S. 137, held that the
National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is precluded from awarding
backpay to undocumented workers because an award to these
specific workers would be beyond the bounds of NLRB's remedial
discretion and run counter to the federal Immigration Reform and
Control Act of 1986 (IRCA). Even though the workers might be
victims of unfair labor practices, the workers were never
legally authorized to work in the United States, and as a
result, the Court held that awarding backpay to undocumented
immigrants would "unduly trench upon explicit statutory
prohibitions critical to federal immigration policy," as
expressed in IRCA and "would encourage the successful evasion of
apprehension by immigration authorities, condone prior
violations of the immigration laws, and encourage future
violations." (Id. at 151, noting at 152 that NLRB's "lack of
authority to award backpay does not mean that the employer gets
off scot-free. The Board here has already imposed other
significant sanctions against Hoffman - sanctions Hoffman does
not challenge.")
In response to Hoffman, this Legislature enacted an urgency
measure, AB 1818 (Romero, Chapter 1071, Statutes of 2002) to
limit the potential effects of that decision on this state's
labor and civil rights laws. The bill codified substantially
similar legislative findings and declarations throughout the
Civil Code, the Government Code, the Labor Code, and the Health
and Safety Code relative to enforcement actions relating to the
rights of immigrants. For example, the following findings and
AB 560
Page 4
declarations were codified in Section 3339 of the Civil Code:
(1) all protections, rights, and remedies available under state
law, except any reinstatement remedy prohibited by federal law,
are available to all individuals, regardless of immigration
status, who have applied for employment, or who are or who have
been employed, in this state; (2) for purposes of enforcing
state labor, employment, civil rights, and employee housing
laws, a person's immigration status is irrelevant to the issue
of liability and no inquiry shall be permitted into a person's
immigration status except when necessary to comply with federal
immigration law; and (3) the bill's provisions are declaratory
of existing law.
This bill, sponsored by the Mexican American Legal Defense and
Educational Fund, now codifies that the immigration status of
children is irrelevant, except as specified. This bill
similarly states that such information is generally inadmissible
for purposes of discovery.
Comments
As stated by the author:
Existing law specifies a number of situations where
immigration status is not to be considered, but it does not
specifically address protections for minor children or
personal injury matters.
California continues to be a leader in protecting undocumented
children and families. AB 560 seeks to end the legal argument
that immigrant children deserve less, when seeking recovery
under the law, simply because they are undocumented. This is
achieved by declaring that a minor's immigration status is
irrelevant to the issue of liability or remedy and by
prohibiting the discovery into a minor child's immigration
status.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal
AB 560
Page 5
Com.:NoLocal: No
SUPPORT: (Verified6/24/15)
Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (source)
Asian Americans Advancing Justice - Sacramento
California Association for Bilingual Education
California Catholic Conference, Inc.
California Communities United Institute
California Equity Leaders Network
California Immigrant Policy Center
California Labor Federation
California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation
Californians Together
Consumer Attorneys of California
Equality California
Latino Coalition for a Healthy California
Latino Health Alliance
National Association of Social Workers-California Chapter
Service Employees International Union-California
OPPOSITION: (Verified6/24/15)
None received
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: The sponsor of this bill, the Mexican
American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, writes that "a
loophole in California law intended to protect undocumented
workers permits tortfeasors, including intentional violators who
choose their victims, to argue that a child victim's recovery
should be limited because of immigration status. Recently, the
Los Angeles Unified School District asserted such an argument in
defending an action brought by children sexually abused in the
classroom. No intentional tortfeasor should be sent the message
that he can avoid the full consequences of his actions by
choosing undocumented victims. And no child should ever be led
to understand that California courts value her future less than
that of other children. AB 560 would close the loophole in
current law, clarifying that our law treats children equally
AB 560
Page 6
regardless of status, and foreclosing any argument to the
contrary."
In support, the California Catholic Conference writes that "AB
560 sends a strong message that predatory behavior toward the
immigrant population will not be tolerated and that the State of
California aims to protect underage individuals from becoming
victims of discrimination, thereby, fulfilling its process to
implement the law and uphold the rights and dignity of all
immigrants."
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 54-22, 4/27/15
AYES: Alejo, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brown, Burke, Calderon,
Chau, Chávez, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Daly, Dodd,
Eggman, Frazier, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto,
Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Roger Hernández,
Holden, Irwin, Jones-Sawyer, Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low,
Mathis, McCarty, Medina, Mullin, Nazarian, O'Donnell, Perea,
Quirk, Rendon, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Mark
Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Weber, Williams, Wood, Atkins
NOES: Achadjian, Travis Allen, Baker, Bigelow, Brough, Dahle,
Beth Gaines, Gallagher, Grove, Hadley, Harper, Jones, Kim,
Lackey, Mayes, Melendez, Obernolte, Patterson, Steinorth,
Wagner, Waldron, Wilk
NO VOTE RECORDED: Campos, Chang, Maienschein, Olsen
Prepared by:Ronak Daylami / JUD. / (916) 651-4113
6/24/15 17:33:33
**** END ****