Share This Post


CAPITOL UPDATE #20 June 2, 2022

June 2, 2022

California Federation of Republican Women
Janet Price, President

        Submitted by the CFRW Legislative Analyst Committee        
Karen Contreras, Gretchen Cox, Elaine Freeman, 
 Theresa Speake, and Cheryl Sullivan

Once again, our legislators are looking for more ways to castrate our law enforcement- Here are some of those efforts:

SB 1389Vehicles: traffic stops.
Existing law authorizes specified peace officers, including agents of the Department of the California Highway Patrol, county sheriffs, and city police officers, to require a driver to stop and submit to an inspection in specified circumstances. This bill would prohibit a peace officer from initiating a motor vehicle stop for a low-level infraction, unless there is separate, independent basis to initiate the stop.

The bill would define “low-level infraction” for this purpose as a violation related to vehicle registration and equipment or the operation of a bicycle, a violation pertaining to the secure fastening of a license plate to the vehicle, and a violation for lighting equipment not illuminating, as specified.

The bill would exclude from “low-level infractions” vehicle registrations that have expired for more than 6 months and violations relating to commercial vehicles. My Chief of Police tells me many arrests for more serious crimes are the result of traffic stops for “minor” reasons.

SB 1000– Law enforcement agencies: radio communications.
Existing law establishes the California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System (CLETS) to make specified criminal justice databases, including individual criminal histories, wanted and missing persons, and stolen firearms, vehicles, and property, available to participating law enforcement agencies.

Existing law prohibits unauthorized access to CLETS and the unlawful use of CLETS information by authorized users. Existing law authorizes the Attorney General to adopt policies, procedures, and practices related to the use of CLETS. These rules require a participating agency to restrict access to CLETS and define “access” as the ability to see or hear any information obtained from CLETS.

This bill would require a law enforcement agency, including the California Highway Patrol, municipal police departments, county sheriff’s departments, specified local law enforcement agencies, and specified university and college police departments, to, by no later than January 1, 2024, ensure public access to the radio communications of that agency, as specified. In short, any member of the public would be able to access any and all radio transmissions by your local police/sheriff or other law enforcement. This is a boon to the bad guys, who will be able to monitor police radio transmissions – nice job, Sacramento!

SB 1038Law enforcement: facial recognition and other biometric surveillance.
Existing law, until January 1, 2023, prohibits a law enforcement agency or law enforcement officer from installing, activating, or using any biometric surveillance system in connection with an officer camera or data collected by an officer camera. Existing law allows a person to bring an action for equitable or declaratory relief against a law enforcement agency or officer who violates this prohibition. This bill would extend these provisions indefinitely. Because a bad guy’s privacy is more important than your safety.

AB 2644 Custodial interrogation
Existing law authorizes a peace officer to take a minor into temporary custody when that officer has reasonable cause to believe that the minor has committed a crime or violated an order of the juvenile court. In these circumstances, existing law requires the peace officer to advise the minor that anything the minor says can be used against the minor, that the minor has the right to remain silent, that the minor has the right to have counsel present during any interrogation, and that the minor has the right to have counsel appointed if the minor is unable to afford counsel.

Existing law requires that a youth 17 years of age or younger consult with legal counsel in person, by telephone, or by video conference prior to a custodial interrogation and before waiving any of the above-specified rights.

This bill would prohibit law enforcement officers from employing threats, physical harm, deception, or psychologically manipulative interrogation tactics, as specified, during an interrogation of a youth 25 years of age or younger. Upon a minor initially being detained, existing law requires an officer to take immediate steps to notify a minor’s parent, guardian, or a responsible relative that the minor is in custody and the place where the minor is being held.

This bill would require a probation officer, no later than 2 hours after a minor has been taken into custody, to immediately notify the public defender or if there is no public defender, the indigent defense provider for the county, that the minor has been taken into custody. So cops must now politely ask the detainee to “pretty-please let us know if you’ve done anything wrong…”

For further information on any of the bills mentioned here, click the Bill # in the email. Or you can CLICK HERE and simply enter the bill # or keywords where designated.

Find/contact your local Legislators, click HERE to inquire about or let them know your opinion about bills or issues.

To contact your U.S. Representatives, call the Capitol Switchboard at (202) 224-3121

Listen to hearings on bills that interest you – 

Calif. Legislative Portal links- Express your support or opposition to a bill or directly to the Legislative committee currently reviewing it (as an individual, not as a member of RWF or CFRW)– click here, or the bill’s author- click hereenter your bill # and look for tab at top of the bill page labeled “Comments to Author”

Forward this article to a friend


Share This Post