BILL ANALYSIS
SB 188
Page 1
Date of Hearing: June 30, 2009
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY
Mike Feuer, Chair
SB 188 (Runner) - As Amended: June 24, 2009
PROPOSED CONSENT (As Proposed to be Amended)
SENATE VOTE : 39-0
SUBJECT : TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDERS: SCHOOLS
KEY ISSUE : SHOULD CERTAIN EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS BE
AUTHORIZED TO SEEK A RESTRAINING ORDER ON BEHALF OF A STUDENT
WHO IS THE SUBJECT OF SPECIFIED THREATS OF VIOLENCE REASONABLY
CONSTRUED TO BE CARRIED OUT ON SCHOOL PROPERTY?
FISCAL EFFECT : As currently in print this bill is keyed fiscal.
SYNOPSIS
This bill responds to an incident in the author's district where
a student who was making threats to other students and staff
members proceeded to attack one of her classmates with a set of
keys, inflicting a serious head injury. In response to this
incident, the administrators of Western Beauty Institute asked
the court for a restraining order but discovered that their
institution is not covered by current law in such a way as to
permit a general restraining order to protect all individuals on
a campus at any given time. As proposed to be amended, the bill
has no opposition.
SUMMARY : Permits specified educational institutions to seek a
restraining order on behalf of a student, as specified.
Specifically, this bill :
1)Authorizes a designated officer of postsecondary educational
institution, a student of which has suffered a specified
threat of violence from any individual which can be reasonably
construed to be carried out at the campus or facility, to seek
a temporary restraining order and an injunction, on behalf of
the student and, at the court's discretion, any number of
other students at the campus or facility.
2)Provides that a temporary restraining order may be granted ex
SB 188
Page 2
parte, at the court's discretion, for up to 15 days, upon the
plaintiff filing a petition for an injunction and an affidavit
that shows reasonable proof that a student has suffered a
credible threat of violence by the defendant, and that great
or irreparable harm would result to the student.
3)Requires the court, within 15 days of the filing of the
petition, to hold a hearing on the petition for the
injunction, where the defendant may file a response or file a
cross-complaint.
4)Provides that if the defendant is a current student of the
entity requesting the injunction, the judge shall receive
evidence concerning the decision of the postsecondary
educational institution decision to retain, terminate, or
otherwise discipline the defendant.
5)Provides that if the judge finds by clear and convincing
evidence that the defendant made a credible threat of
violence, an injunction shall be issued prohibiting further
threats of violence with a duration of not more than three
years.
6)Provides that any intentional and knowing violation of the
temporary restraining order is a misdemeanor punishable by a
fine of not more than $1000, or by imprisonment in a county
jail for not more than one year, or both.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Authorizes any employer, whose employee has suffered unlawful
violence or a credible threat of violence from any individual,
to seek a temporary restraining order and an injunction on
behalf of the employee and, at the discretion of the court,
any number of other employees at the workplace, and, if
appropriate, other employees at other workplaces of the
employer. (Code of Civil Procedure 527.8.)
2)Authorizes individuals to seek restraining orders and
protective orders to enjoin acts of domestic violence (Family
Code Sections 6320, 6321, & 6322), elder abuse (Welfare &
Institutions Code Section 15657.03), and civil harassment
(Code of Civil Procedure Section 527.6), among others.
3)Provides that any intentional and knowing violation of
SB 188
Page 3
specified protective orders (including those listed above) is
a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not more than $1000, or
by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one year,
or both. (Penal Code Section 273.6.)
4)Provides that every student or employee who has been suspended
or dismissed for disrupting the orderly operation of the
campus or facility, and as a condition of the suspension or
dismissal has been denied access to the campus or facility,
willfully and knowingly enters the campus or facility is
guilty of a misdemeanor. (Penal Code Section 626.2.)
5)Authorizes the chief administrative officer of a school, as
defined, to notify a person that consent to remain on the
school campus or facility has been withdrawn whenever there is
reasonable cause to believe that such person has willfully
disrupted the orderly operation of the campus or facility.
(Penal Code Section 626.4(a).)
6)Provides that a person who willfully and knowingly enters or
remains on the school campus or in the school facility during
the period for which consent has been withdrawn is guilty of a
misdemeanor. (Penal Code Section 626.4(d).)
7)Authorizes the chief administrative official of a school to
direct a person who is interfering with the peaceful conduct
of the activities of the campus or facility to leave the
premises. Further provides that if that person fails to do so
or willfully and knowingly re-enters the campus or facility
within seven days, he or she is guilty of a misdemeanor.
(Penal Code Sections 626.6 & 626.7.)
8)Provides that any person who comes into any school building or
near any school ground without lawful business, and whose
presence or acts interfere with the peaceful conduct of the
activities of the school, is guilty of a misdemeanor if the
person remains after being asked to leave, reenters within
seven days, or has otherwise established a continued pattern
of unauthorized entry. (Penal Code Section 626.8.)
9)Provides that every person who, by physical force and with the
intent to prevent attendance or instruction, willfully
obstructs or attempts to obstruct any student or teacher
seeking to attend or instruct classes at any of the campuses
or facilities of the University of California, California
SB 188
Page 4
State University, or a community college district shall be
punished by a fine of up to $500, by imprisonment in a county
jail for up to one year, or both. (Penal Code Section
602.10.)
COMMENTS : The author relates that the idea for this bill arises
from an incident that occurred at an adult beauty institute in
Lancaster, California. According to the author, the Western
Beauty Institute (WBI) expelled a student who was making threats
to other students and staff members. After being expelled, the
student proceeded to attack one of her classmates with a set of
keys, inflicting a serious head injury. In response to this
incident, the administrators of WBI asked the court for a
restraining order but discovered that educational facilities are
not covered by current law. Therefore, there is currently no
mechanism to issue a blanket restraining order to protect all
individuals on a campus at any given time. As proposed to be
amended, the bill is appropriately limited to the private
postsecondary schools whose students are the subject of
off-campus threats that are understood to be carried out on
campus because law enforcement officials advise that these
threats are not covered by existing criminal and civil
protections, and excludes minors and public schools and where
serious and countervailing constitutional, educational,
parental, due-process and other important legal rights and
concerns are implicated. In order to avoid undue safety risks,
the bill also appropriately requires the consent of the student.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
Western Beauty College (sponsor)
Los Angeles Unified School District
San Francisco Unified School District
Opposition
None on file
Analysis Prepared by : Kevin G. Baker / JUD. / (916) 319-2334