Assembly BillVetoedPenal
AB 1537: Peace officers: secondary employment.
What AB 1537 does, verified October 1, 2026
This bill aims to prohibit peace officers from being employed by or contracting with entities that engage in immigration enforcement, including the US Department of Homeland Security. The bill makes this employment a form of dishonesty and grounds for decertification as a peace officer. Peace officers must report any secondary employment related to immigration enforcement to their employing law enforcement agency. The bill also states that records related to this secondary employment are public records. The state will be required to reimburse local agencies and school districts for any costs associated with implementing this bill.
Bill journey
✓IntroducedComplete
✓In CommitteeComplete
✓First Chamber FloorComplete
✓Second ChamberComplete
5GovernorCurrent
6ChapteredPending
Last action: Vetoed by Governor. (2026-09-30)Alert me
Author and sponsors
Full contact details, staff, and committees with Connect, $16/moUnlockRecent actions27 total · showing 5
| Sep. 30, 2026 | Vetoed by Governor. |
| Sep. 09, 2026 | Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 1 p.m. |
| Aug. 30, 2026 | Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 46. Noes 22. Page 6909.). |
| Aug. 30, 2026 | In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. |
| Aug. 30, 2026 | Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 27. Noes 11.). |
Latest bill textEnrolled version, September 3, 2026 · 2,348 words
| Enrolled September 03, 2026 |
| Passed IN Senate August 30, 2026 |
| Passed IN Assembly August 30, 2026 |
| Amended IN Senate August 21, 2026 |
| Amended IN Senate August 19, 2026 |
| Amended IN Senate June 25, 2026 |
| Amended IN Assembly May 18, 2026 |
CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE— 2025–2026 REGULAR SESSION
Assembly Bill
No. 1537
| Introduced by Assembly Members Bryan, Carrillo, and Ortega (Principal coauthors: Assembly Members Mark González and Kalra) (Coauthors: Assembly Members Ahrens, Ávila Farías, Bonta, Connolly, Haney, Lee, and Rogers) (Coauthors: Senators Gonzalez, Reyes, and Rubio) |
January 05, 2026 |
An act to amend Section 70 of the Penal Code, relating to peace officers.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
AB 1537, Bryan. Peace officers: secondary employment.
Existing law provides that every executive or ministerial officer, employee, or appointee of the State of California, or any county or city therein, or any political subdivision thereof, who knowingly asks, receives, or agrees to receive any emolument, gratuity, or reward, or any promise thereof excepting such as may be authorized by law for doing an official act, is guilty of a misdemeanor. Existing law exempts from that offense certain employment by a peace officer while off duty, as specified. Existing law also provides that a peace officer shall not be prohibited from engaging in other employment while off duty, as specified.
This bill would, notwithstanding those provisions, prohibit certain peace officers from engaging in any form of secondary employment, including contract based or as an individual contractor, that involves engaging in arresting, detaining, transporting, or deporting individuals pursuant to federal or out-of-state immigration laws. The bill would provide that failure to comply with this provision may constitute, for certain purposes, an act of serious misconduct and that it is grounds for decertification as a peace officer. The bill would require certain peace officers to report to their employing law enforcement agency any conditional offer of secondary employment relating to immigration enforcement. The bill would require the law enforcement agency to maintain specified records related to secondary employment. By imposing additional duties on local law enforcement agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would also explicitly state that these records related to secondary employment of certain peace officers are public records for the purposes of the California Public Records Act.
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
SECTION 1.
The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:(a) Immigrants are valuable and essential members of the California community. Almost 1 in 3 Californians is foreign born and 1 in 2 children in California has at least one immigrant parent.
(b) The relationship between California’s immigrant community and state and local law enforcement is central to the public safety of the people of California.
(c) While California currently regulates secondary employment for law enforcement officers to prevent conflicts of interest, inefficiency, and negative impact on an agency’s reputation or public trust, nothing in state law specifically prevents local and state law enforcement officers from accepting secondary employment that involves engaging in immigration enforcement activities.
(d) Local and state law enforcement officers engaging in secondary employment that involves arresting, detaining, transporting, and deporting individuals they have vowed to protect and serve presents a glaring breach of trust and conflict of interest. California has a vested interest in ensuring that local and state law enforcement officers’ ability to fulfill their professional duties and trust with California communities is not impaired or jeopardized by their secondary employment roles and activities.
(e) California has a vested interest in ensuring that its law enforcement officers are properly trained and act in compliance with state and federal laws and the United States Constitution. Secondary employment engaging in immigration enforcement activities may erode the training local and state law enforcement officers receive in their primary employment and lead to violations of state and federal laws and the California and United States Constitutions.
(f) Members of the public deserve to know that their local and state law enforcement agencies are following state law as it relates to secondary employment that gives rise to degradation of public trust and training. As Californians have a right of access to government records, nothing in this act shall be construed as a limitation on the right of public access to records regarding secondary employment of peace officers.
(g) The Legislature has previously recognized that “[e]ntangling state and local agencies with federal immigration enforcement programs diverts already limited resources and blurs the lines of accountability between local, state, and federal governments.” Yet, Texas and Florida have sought not only to entangle their local and state agencies with federal immigration enforcement, but to enact their own state-level deportation laws and schemes allowing their law enforcement officers to take on immigration enforcement roles.
(h) In May of 2026, over the serious objections of top constitutional experts, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit allowed Texas’ Senate Bill 4 to go into effect. This law, which civil rights organizations have characterized as one of the most extreme, anti-immigrant laws ever written, allows local law enforcement in Texas to directly engage in immigration enforcement by arresting individuals under state level “illegal entry” and “illegal re-entry” charges, and further allows, and in some cases requires, state judges to issue their own deportation orders, with prison sentences of up to 20 years for those who do not comply.
(i) Florida’s Senate Bill 2-C was signed into law in 2025. It creates the State Board of Immigration Enforcement within the Florida Department of Law Enforcement to coordinate with, and facilitate, a mass deportation agenda. This use of law enforcement resources runs counter to California’s commitment to protect the safety, well-being, and constitutional rights of the people of California.
SEC. 2.
Section 70 of the Penal Code is amended to read:70.
(a) Every executive or ministerial officer, employee, or appointee of the State of California, or any county or city therein, or any political subdivision thereof, who knowingly asks, receives, or agrees to receive any emolument, gratuity, or reward, or any promise thereof excepting such as may be authorized by law for doing an official act, is guilty of a misdemeanor.(b) This section does not prohibit deputy registrars of voters from receiving compensation when authorized by local ordinance from any candidate, political committee, or statewide political organization for securing the registration of voters.
(c) (1) Nothing in this section precludes a peace officer, as defined in Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 830) of Title 3 of Part 2, from engaging in, or being employed in, casual or part-time employment as a private security guard or patrolman for a public entity while off duty from their principal employment and outside their regular employment as a peace officer of a state or local agency, and exercising the powers of a peace officer concurrently with that employment, provided that the peace officer is in a police uniform and is subject to reasonable rules and regulations of the agency for which they are a peace officer. Notwithstanding the above provisions, any and all civil and criminal liability arising out of the secondary employment of any peace officer pursuant to this subdivision shall be borne by the officer’s secondary employer.
(2) It is the intent of the Legislature by this subdivision to abrogate the holdings in People v. Corey, 21 Cal.3d 738, and Cervantez v. J. C. Penney Co., 24 Cal.3d 579, to reinstate prior judicial interpretations of this section as they relate to criminal sanctions for battery on peace officers who are employed, on a part-time or casual basis, by a public entity, while wearing a police uniform as private security guards or patrolmen, and to allow the exercise of peace officer powers concurrently with that employment.
(d) (1) Nothing in this section precludes a peace officer, as defined in Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 830) of Title 3 of Part 2, from engaging in, or being employed in, casual or part-time employment as a private security guard or patrolman by a private employer while off duty from their principal employment and outside their regular employment as a peace officer, and exercising the powers of a peace officer concurrently with that employment, provided that all of the following are true:
(A) The peace officer is in their police uniform.
(B) The casual or part-time employment as a private security guard or patrolman is approved by the county board of supervisors with jurisdiction over the principal employer or by the board’s designee or by the city council with jurisdiction over the principal employer or by the council’s designee.
(C) The wearing of uniforms and equipment is approved by the principal employer.
(D) The peace officer is subject to reasonable rules and regulations of the agency for which they are a peace officer.
(2) Notwithstanding the above provisions, a peace officer while off duty from their principal employment and outside their regular employment as a peace officer of a state or local agency shall not exercise the powers of a police officer if employed by a private employer as a security guard during a strike, lockout, picketing, or other physical demonstration of a labor dispute at the site of the strike, lockout, picketing, or other physical demonstration of a labor dispute. The issue of whether or not casual or part-time employment as a private security guard or patrolman pursuant to this subdivision is to be approved shall not be a subject for collective bargaining. Any and all civil and criminal liability arising out of the secondary employment of any peace officer pursuant to this subdivision shall be borne by the officer’s principal employer. The principal employer shall require the secondary employer to enter into an indemnity agreement as a condition of approving casual or part-time employment pursuant to this subdivision.
(3) It is the intent of the Legislature by this subdivision to abrogate the holdings in People v. Corey, 21 Cal.3d 738, and Cervantez v. J. C. Penney Co., 24 Cal.3d 579, to reinstate prior judicial interpretations of this section as they relate to criminal sanctions for battery on peace officers who are employed, on a part-time or casual basis, while wearing a police uniform approved by the principal employer, as private security guards or patrolmen, and to allow the exercise of peace officer powers concurrently with that employment.
(e) (1) Nothing in this section precludes a peace officer, as defined in Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 830) of Title 3 of Part 2, from engaging in, or being employed in, other employment while off duty from their principal employment and outside their regular employment as a peace officer of a state or local agency.
(2) Subject to subdivisions (c) and (d), and except as provided by written regulations or policies adopted by the employing state or local agency, or pursuant to an agreement between the employing state or local agency and a recognized employee organization representing the peace officer, no peace officer shall be prohibited from engaging in, or being employed in, other employment while off duty from their principal employment and outside their regular employment as a peace officer of a state or local agency.
(3) If an employer withholds consent to allow a peace officer to engage in or be employed in other employment while off duty, the employer shall, at the time of denial, provide the reasons for denial in writing to the peace officer.
(f) (1) Notwithstanding subdivisions (c), (d), and (e), a peace officer shall not engage in any form of secondary employment, including contract based or as an individual contractor, that involves engaging in arresting, detaining, transporting, or deporting individuals pursuant to federal or out-of-state immigration laws. This does not include service with any branch of the United States Armed Forces.
(2) For purposes of Section 13510.8, a violation of paragraph (1) is an act of serious misconduct and may constitute grounds for decertification pursuant to Article 2 (commencing with Section 13510) of Chapter 1 of Title 4 of Part 4.
(3) A peace officer shall report to their employing law enforcement agency any conditional offer of secondary employment subject to paragraph (1).
(4) For the purposes of this subdivision, the following terms have the following meanings:
(A) “Law enforcement agency” means any local or state entity that employs a peace officer.
(B) “Conditional offer” is defined as any communication from a potential employer to an individual officially offering an individual to accept a position.
(C) “Peace officer” means a peace officer as defined in subdivisions (a) and (c) of Section 830.1, subdivisions (a) through (d), inclusive, of Section 830.2, and Section 830.5.
(D) “Response” is defined as any communication from a peace officer replying to a conditional offer.
(g) Records that fall under paragraph (3) of subdivision (f), and any records related to secondary employment described in paragraph (1) of subdivision (f), including records of investigations into violations of that provision where there is a sustained finding that a violation did occur, shall be maintained by the law enforcement agency and shall constitute public records for purposes of the California Public Records Act (Division 10 (commencing with Section 7920.000) of Title 1 of the Government Code).
(h) The provisions of this act are severable. If any provision of this act or its application is held invalid, that invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application.
SEC. 3.
If the Commission on State Mandates determines that this act contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement to local agencies and school districts for those costs shall be made pursuant to Part 7 (commencing with Section 17500) of Division 4 of Title 2 of the Government Code.Text of AB 1537 as enrolled, from the official record. Connect Plus keeps every version and highlights what changed.Compare versions