BILL ANALYSIS Ó AB 2707 Page 1 CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS AB 2707 (Ridley-Thomas) As Amended August 4, 2016 Majority vote -------------------------------------------------------------------- |ASSEMBLY: |76-0 |(May 19, 2016) |SENATE: | 38-0 |(August 15, | | | | | | |2016) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | -------------------------------------------------------------------- Original Committee Reference: JUD. SUMMARY: Prohibits "consumer racial profiling," as defined. Specifically, this bill: 1)Prohibits a business establishment from using "consumer racial profiling." 2)Defines "consumer racial profiling" to include the following: a) 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. b) Refusal to serve, removal from the business AB 2707 Page 2 establishment premises, segregated seating, requiring additional forms of identification, race-based surveillance practices, and similar race-based practices. 3)Gives the Department of Fair Employment and Housing the power to receive, investigate, conciliate, mediate, and prosecute complaints alleging a violation of this bill. The Senate amendments incorporate additional changes to Section 12930 of the Government Code, proposed by SB 1442 (Liu), to be operative only if SB 1442 and this bill are both chaptered and become effective on or before January 1, 2017, and this bill is chaptered last. 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 Section (CIV) 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. (CIV 51.5 (a).) 3)Provides, under federal law, that all persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, AB 2707 Page 3 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 United States Code Section 2000a.) FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8, negligible state costs. COMMENTS: As much as we sometimes like to think otherwise, we have yet to obtain the "color blind" society that Justice Harlan hoped for in his powerful dissent in Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), the decision that bequeathed the infamous "separate but equal" doctrine and put the U.S. Supreme Court's stamp of legitimacy on Jim Crow segregation in the South, until the doctrine was finally rejected nearly sixty years later in Brown v. Board of Education (1954). One example of our seeming inability to be truly "color blind" is seen in what a number of scholars and commentators refer to as "consumer racial profiling" or "Shopping While Black." That is, while business establishments no longer hang "Whites Only" signs on their front doors, a number of academic studies suggest that once people of color walk inside those stores they are treated differently. For example, the Center for Popular Democracy cites studies showing that African-American customers are seven times more likely to be targeted by store clerks and security personnel as potential shoplifters than are white customers. In addition to race-based surveillance practices, consumer racial profiling may include other forms of differential treatment of customers of color, including refusing service, offering service of lesser quality, making race-based assumptions about a customer's ability to afford a product, or requiring additional forms of identification. Existing law, 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 a several enumerated characteristics, including race or color. Therefore, some of the retailer conduct that constitutes AB 2707 Page 4 "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. For example, the Unruh Civil Rights Act states that all persons are entitled, regardless of race, to "full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, or services" in all business establishments. It seems clear that consumer racial profiling that leads to different levels of service, a removal from the facilities, or a denial of full access to facilities would be prohibited by language of the Unruh Act. However, whether these words in the Unruh Act would cover race-based surveillance is more questionable, since surveillance may not affect the "service" provided or deny equal access to the facilities. If a court were to reasonably conclude that, taken as a whole, the purpose of the Unruh Act is to guarantee equal "treatment" by business establishments, then engaging in race-based surveillance would certainly seem to constitute unequal "treatment." But the word "treatment" does not appear in the statute. In order to eliminate potential ambiguities, this bill will make it clear that all forms of consumer racial profiling violate the Unruh Civil Rights Act. In addition, the bill authorizes the Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) to receive, investigate, and prosecute allegations of racial profiling. Under existing law, DFEH is given express authority to enforce a sequence of statutes in and around the Unruh Civil Rights that guarantee various civil and personal rights. This bill simply adds a new section to this sequence of statutes and then references that statute in the provisions of Government Code granting investigative and enforcement powers to the DFEH. As noted by the sponsors and supporters of this bill, expressly granting this authority to DFEH is an important component of the bill, as the non-economic nature of the harm caused by consumer racial profiling makes it less likely that a private attorney would take such a case. Analysis Prepared by: Thomas Clark / JUD. / (916) 319-2334 FN: 0003869 AB 2707 Page 5