CA: Public Safety Committee Approves AB 1568 Despite Lack of Support

Source: ACSOL

The CA Assembly’s Public Safety Committee today approved AB 1568 despite a lack of support for that bill.  In direct contrast, 24 people including ACSOL leaders and members as well as leaders of other organizations voiced their opposition to the bill.

The petitioning process under the Tiered Registry Bill is not broken and therefore it does not to be fixed,” ACSOL Executive Director Janice Bellucci testified.  “The petitioning process is working well as evidenced by the fact that about 12,000 petitions have been filed so far.  Of that total, courts have granted about 10,000 petitions and denied 167 petitions.  The remaining petitions are pending final review.”

If passed, AB 1568 could block individuals from petitioning for removal from the registry although they are currently eligible to file a petition.  For those not blocked from petitioning, the bill would lengthen and complicate the petitioning process that currently takes up to six months to complete.

The organizations who joined ACSOL today in opposition to HR 1568 include the ACLU, Public Defenders Association and California Attorneys for Criminal Justice (CACJ).  CACJ lobbyist Ignacio Hernandez joined Bellucci in testifying against the bill.

“If this bill becomes law, many individuals would be blocked from petitioning for removal from the registry because they cannot afford to travel to the courthouse where their petition has been filed,” Hernandez testified.

The only person to testify in support of HR 1568 was deputy district attorney Margot Roen of Stanislaus County.  In her testimony, Roen did not state she was representing the District Attorney of that county.

“It is interesting to note that no District Attorney testified today or submitted a letter of support for HR 1568,” stated Bellucci.  “In fact, the legislative analysis of the bill did not list any organization or individuals in support of the bill.  However, the bill analysis lists ten organizations and five individuals who oppose HR 1568.”

Due to its passage by the Assembly Public Safety Committee today, the bill will next be considered by the Assembly Appropriations Committee.  The date for that committee hearing has not yet been set.

“There will be many opportunities in the future to stop HR 1568 from passage,” stated Bellucci.  “Today’s hearing was merely the first step in a multi-step process.”

Download the bill analysis:

AB 1568 - Bill Analysis - March 202603032026

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

If you are feeling extremely depressed and possibly even suicidal, please call or text 988 (suicide hotline) or any loved one who you believe is immediately available. If you feel depressed and in need of a friendly community and unbiased emotional support, you can email Alex and Marty at emotionalsupportgroup@all4consolaws.org

 

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

  1. Submissions must be in English
  2. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  3. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  4. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  5. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Always use person-first language.
  6. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  7. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  8. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  9. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  10. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address that are not personally identifiable.
  11. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  12. Please do not post in all Caps.
  13. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  14. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  15. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  16. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  17. Please do not solicit funds
  18. No discussions about weapons
  19. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  20. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  21. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  22. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  23. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify or abbreviate their name. 
  24. Please check for typos, spelling, punctuation, and grammar errors before submitting.  Comments that have many errors will not be approved. 
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
 

5 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

WOW… California government is totally PATHETIC !!

I wonder if the Assembly Public Safety Committee felt pressure to vote for approval due to the author of the bill also being a member of that same committee.

This leads me to wonder if the Assembly Appropriations Committee might be more likely to listen to logic and reason when it comes to this asinine bill (whose sole purpose is to be used as a low effort bullet point for Alanis to boost his political career).

None of his proposed changes make logical sense or are based on any official recommendations.

Will the Assembly Appropriations Committee actually have the integrity to acknowledge how stupid this bill is?

What? Our lawmakers are just making laws for no reason? Never…except always.

Why am I not surprised? This bull bill should have died in committee but since the author was vice chairman of the committee and the safety of those required to register and their families has never a top priority for political leaders wanting to appear tough on crime it will live for now. It seems as though today’s outcome was already decided before the hearing even started. Was there some kind of wealthy lobby from the polygraph industry behind the decision or just wasted life-support for a brain dead Assembly amendment bill? I’m hoping it dies and brings attention to the insanity of the punishment that never ends.