BILL ANALYSIS Ó AB 2707 Page 1 Date of Hearing: April 19, 2016 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PRIVACY AND CONSUMER PROTECTION Ed Chau, Chair AB 2707 (Ridley-Thomas) - As Amended April 11, 2016 SUBJECT: Stop Consumer Racial Profiling Act of 2016 SUMMARY: Prohibits "consumer racial profiling," defined as the targeting of a person that results in differential treatment of a consumer based on race or ethnicity, and gives the Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) authority to receive consumer complaints and investigate and prosecute violations. Specifically, this bill: 1)Prohibits a business establishment from using "consumer racial profiling" in its business. 2)Defines "consumer racial profiling" to mean profiling or targeting of a person that results in differential treatment based on his or her race or ethnicity and that constitutes a denial or degradation in the product or service offered to customers. 3)Specifies that "consumer racial profiling" includes, but is not limited to, refusal to serve, removal from the business establishment premises, segregated seating, requiring additional forms of identification, and surveillance practices AB 2707 Page 2 based on race or ethnicity. 4)Gives DFEH the power to receive, investigate, conciliate, mediate, and prosecute complaints alleging a violation of this bill. EXISTING LAW: 1)Provides, under the Unruh Civil Rights Act, that all persons within this state are free and equal, and no matter what their sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sexual orientation, citizenship, primary language, or immigration status, are entitled to the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, or services of all business establishments of every kind whatsoever. (Civil Code (CC) Section 51.) 2)Provides that no business establishment of any kind whatsoever shall discriminate against, boycott or blacklist, or refuse to buy from, contract with, sell to, or trade with any person in this state on account of sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sexual orientation, citizenship, primary language, or immigration status. (CC 51.5 (a).) 3)Provides, under federal law, that all persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin. (42 U.S.C. Section 2000a.) AB 2707 Page 3 FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown COMMENTS: 1)Purpose of this bill . This bill is intended to give consumers harmed by racial profiling tactics a means of redress by empowering DFEH to prosecute complaints. This measure is sponsored by the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights. 2)Author's statement . According to the author's office, "Federal and state public accommodation laws are often ill-equipped to address consumer racial profiling. Courts often fail to understand the subtle nature of modern discrimination and interpret civil rights statutes narrowly requiring plaintiffs to establish specific harms. However, no incident of consumer racial profiling is harmless. The use of consumer racial profiling negatively impacts the quality of life for African Americans and other ethnic minorities. Furthermore, the victims of consumer racial profiling feel as if they remain second-class citizens, marginalized by the rest of society. All consumers, regardless of race or ethnicity, should enjoy fair and equal treatment in the marketplace." 3)Racial profiling still a problem . According to a survey of workers at the high-end fashion retailer Zara's New York City stores, black customers are seven times more likely to be targeted as potential thieves than white customers. The survey suggested that both race and ethnic discrimination remain challenging problems, given that industry studies on actual shop lifting trends in retail stores indicate no differences by race or ethnicity. ("Stitched with Prejudice: Zara USA's Corporate Culture of Favoritism," Center for Popular Democracy; "Courting Customers: Assessing Consumer AB 2707 Page 4 Racial Profiling and Other Marketplace Discrimination," Journal of Public Policy & Marketing) According to the author, in California there have been numerous reports of consumer racial profiling, including targeting ethnic minority consumers as potential criminals, unworthy of service, and being unable to afford high-end merchandise available for purchase. The author notes these incidents have impacted celebrity and working-class ethnic minorities alike. 4)The Unruh Civil Rights Act of 1959 . Since the enactment of the state Unruh Civil Rights Act of 1959 and the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964, all people are legally entitled to equal access to businesses and the right to service regardless of race or ethnicity. The author contends that despite these strong civil rights laws, discrimination in the marketplace remains a significant problem. The Unruh Civil Rights Act already provides that no person shall be denied equal treatment or services in "all business establishments of any kind whatsoever" on the basis of several enumerated characteristics, including race or color. Therefore, some of the retailer conduct that constitutes "consumer racial profiling" may already be a violation of the Unruh Civil Rights Act. However, as with any general statute, the full range of conduct that a particular word or clause might encompass is not always clear. The Unruh Civil Rights Act states, for example, that all persons are entitled, regardless of race, to "full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, or services" in all business establishments. The author contends these words may not cover specific activities, such as race-based surveillance AB 2707 Page 5 of consumers who are shopping, since depending on whether or not the consumer becomes aware or is treated differently because of the surveillance, it may not result in a denial of "full and equal accommodation, advantages, facilities, privileges, or services" under current law. According to the author and the bill's sponsor, Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights, the majority of the egregious consumer racial profiling cases are settled out of court, which limits our knowledge about the deficiencies that may exist under current law. When a full trial is held in a case and the appeals process is exhausted, then a court decision can provide nuanced, binding interpretations of what the words in a statute actually mean when applied to a specific practice, such as racial profiling to surveil consumers who are shopping. 5)The Stop Consumer Racial Profiling Act of 2016 . This bill defines and prohibits "consumer racial profiling" as the profiling or targeting of a person that results in differential treatment based on his or her race or ethnicity and that constitutes a denial or degradation in the consumer product or service offered to consumers. The bill authorizes DFEH to receive, investigate, and prosecute allegations of racial profiling, which would give victims of consumer racial profiling a specific government agency where they can report incidents of discrimination. While existing law already gives DFEH express authority to AB 2707 Page 6 enforce the Unruh Civil Rights Act, this bill expressly grants DFEH authority to investigate and prosecute consumer racial profiling. The author contends that it is important to give DFEH this specific prosecutorial authority because of the non-economic nature of the harm caused by consumer racial profiling, which makes it less likely that a private attorney would take such a case. 6)Arguments in support . According to the sponsor, the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area (LCCR), this measure will "prohibit a business establishment from using consumer racial profiling and makes the Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) responsible for the enforcement of this act. AB 2707 would make it clear that all forms of consumer racial profiling violate the Unruh Civil Rights Act. It would also ensure that consumers have a designated state entity to report incidents of racial profiling." The Black Women Organized for Political Action (BWOPA) supports this bill because "it will send a strong message to all of California's retailers that all consumers, regardless of race or ethnicity, are entitled to fair and equal treatment." Consumer Federation of California (CFC) states in support that the bill would prohibit businesses from "profiling consumers in a way that results in differential treatment based on race or ethnicity and a denial or diminution in the product or AB 2707 Page 7 service offered to consumers." CFC further notes that customers of color "are followed, stopped, searched, harassed, and confronted with differential security measures almost entirely because of their race ? and that no consumer should be made to feel marginalized or persecuted." 7)Related legislation . AB 1684 (Stone) authorizes DFEH to investigate and prosecute complaints of human trafficking and to bring a civil action on behalf of a person harmed by human trafficking and stipulates that damages awarded pursuant to a civil action must be awarded to the person harmed, and that any costs and attorney's fees awarded must be awarded to DFEH. This bill is currently pending referral in the Senate Rules Committee. SB 1442 (Liu) reorganizes various statutes regarding discrimination and removes the authority of DFEH and the Business, Consumer Services, and Housing Agency to promulgate regulations to prohibit discrimination. This bill is currently pending in the Senate Judiciary Committee. 8)Double-referral . This bill was double-referred to the Assembly Judiciary Committee where it passed 10-0 on April 5, 2016. REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION: Support Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area (sponsor) Black Women Organized for Political Action AB 2707 Page 8 California State Conference of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People Consumer Attorneys of California Consumer Federation of California Opposition None on file. Analysis Prepared by:Jennie Bretschneider / P. & C.P. / (916) 319-2200