California 2017-2018 Regular Session

California Assembly Bill AB1138

Introduced
2/17/17  
Refer
3/27/17  
Report Pass
3/28/17  
Report Pass
3/28/17  
Refer
3/29/17  
Refer
3/29/17  
Report Pass
4/17/17  
Report Pass
4/17/17  
Refer
4/18/17  
Refer
4/18/17  
Report Pass
4/26/17  
Report Pass
4/26/17  
Refer
4/26/17  
Report Pass
5/10/17  
Engrossed
5/18/17  
Engrossed
5/18/17  
Refer
5/18/17  
Refer
5/18/17  
Refer
6/1/17  
Refer
6/1/17  
Report Pass
6/19/17  
Report Pass
6/19/17  
Refer
6/19/17  
Refer
6/19/17  
Report Pass
7/12/17  
Report Pass
7/12/17  
Refer
7/12/17  
Refer
7/12/17  
Enrolled
9/5/17  
Enrolled
9/5/17  
Vetoed
10/13/17  

Caption

Sale of cats or dogs.

Impact

If enacted, AB 1138 will have significant implications for marketing practices in the pet industry. It will enforce stricter guidelines and establish substantial penalties for false advertising, thus promoting ethical conduct among sellers. This change is expected to improve consumer trust and push for better business practices within the pet sales sector. Furthermore, since the bill stipulates that no reimbursement is required for costs imposed on local agencies due to its enactment, it will allow the state to implement these regulations without incurring additional financial burdens on local governments.

Summary

Assembly Bill No. 1138, introduced by Assembly Member Maienschein, addresses the sale and advertising of pets in California. The bill aims to protect consumers from misleading claims related to the sale of cats and dogs. It specifically prohibits entities from advertising or promoting the sale of these pets if the information presented is false or if there is no actual intent to sell the advertised animal. By making violations subject to misdemeanor penalties, the bill establishes a legal framework to deter deceptive practices in the pet sale industry, enhancing accountability among sellers.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding AB 1138 appears to be largely positive, reflecting a growing public concern for animal welfare and consumer rights. Supporters of the bill appreciate its potential to enhance consumer protection and reduce instances of animal cruelty linked to fraudulent sales. However, opposition may arise from some business stakeholders who are concerned about the administrative burden and the implications of a stricter regulatory environment on their operations. Despite potential criticisms, the overall reception is favorable towards ensuring truthful marketing and protecting pet buyers.

Contention

The notable points of contention surrounding AB 1138 center on the balance between protecting consumers and the potential for regulatory overreach. Critics may argue that the new rules could unintentionally hinder small businesses or breeders who operate in good faith. Additionally, discussions on the enforcement of these new standards, including how they will be monitored and the severity of penalties imposed for violations, may arise as critical factors that lawmakers and stakeholders will need to address as the bill moves through the legislative process.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA AB535

Olive oil: labeling.

CA AB2074

Agriculture: olive oil: labeling.

CA AB1899

Courts.

CA AB1330

Alcoholic beverage tied-house restrictions: exceptions: County of Riverside.

CA SB430

Tied-house exceptions: advertising: common parent company.

CA AB1245

Political Reform Act of 1974: contribution prohibitions.

CA AB2896

Alcoholic beverages: tied-house restrictions: advertising.

CA SB1495

Tied-house restrictions: for-profit cemeteries: City of Los Angeles.