Public employment: disqualifications.
Vote required
Majority
Fiscal committee
No
Appropriation
No
Current location
In Floor Process
Take action
Record your position on this measure.
Create an account to record your position, submit testimony, or contact your legislator.
Progress
Where this bill stands in the legislative process.
- Introduced
- Passed Assembly
- Passed Senate
- To Governor
- Became Law
Overview
This bill, known as the GTFO Act, aims to disqualify individuals from becoming peace officers in California if they were previously employed by an entity involved in immigration enforcement between January 20, 2025, and January 20, 2029. It adds this employment history as a minimum standard to meet, alongside existing requirements like good moral character and freedom from bias. The bill also clarifies that certain public agencies, such as local law enforcement and state correctional facilities, are exempt from this disqualification. Finally, it addresses potential state-mandated costs associated with the legislation.
Key provisions
- Disqualifies individuals previously employed by immigration enforcement entities (Jan 20, 2025 - Jan 20, 2029) from becoming peace officers.
- Adds prior immigration enforcement employment as a minimum standard for peace officer eligibility.
- Exempts certain public agencies (local agencies, local law enforcement, California law enforcement, Department of Corrections) from the disqualification.
- Requires peace officers to be free from bias against protected characteristics (race, ethnicity, gender, etc.).
- Addresses potential state-mandated costs associated with the act.
- Provides for a statewide application of the bill, including charter cities.
- Adds Section 1025 to the Government Code.
- Clarifies that requesting immigration status information from federal authorities does not violate the bill's provisions.
Who is affected
Bill text
Read the latest version inline or switch to a previous version.
Text extraction is in progress. View the official source.
Sponsors
Official sponsors from legislative records.
15 on record
Primary sponsor
Arguments
Reasons offered for and against this legislation.
Arguments in favor
No arguments in favor have been submitted.
Submit yoursArguments opposed
No arguments opposed have been submitted.
Submit yours