California 2023-2024 Regular Session

California Assembly Bill AB2239

Introduced
2/8/24  
Introduced
2/8/24  
Refer
3/18/24  
Refer
3/18/24  
Report Pass
3/18/24  
Refer
3/19/24  
Refer
3/19/24  
Report Pass
4/1/24  
Refer
4/2/24  
Refer
4/2/24  
Report Pass
4/11/24  
Report Pass
4/11/24  
Refer
4/16/24  
Refer
4/16/24  
Report Pass
4/23/24  
Report Pass
4/23/24  
Refer
4/25/24  
Refer
4/25/24  
Report Pass
4/29/24  
Report Pass
4/29/24  
Refer
4/30/24  
Refer
4/30/24  
Refer
5/15/24  
Refer
5/15/24  
Report Pass
5/16/24  
Report Pass
5/16/24  
Engrossed
5/22/24  
Engrossed
5/22/24  
Refer
5/23/24  
Refer
5/23/24  
Refer
6/12/24  
Refer
6/12/24  
Report Pass
7/2/24  
Report Pass
7/2/24  
Refer
7/2/24  
Refer
7/2/24  
Report Pass
7/3/24  
Report Pass
7/3/24  
Refer
7/3/24  
Refer
7/3/24  
Refer
8/5/24  

Caption

Digital discrimination of access: prohibition.

Impact

If enacted, AB 2239 would facilitate a more inclusive digital landscape by mandating that the California Public Utilities Commission implement rules for grant programs such as the California Advanced Services Fund. This would enable grants to be awarded only to entities that attest they will not engage in discriminatory practices. The goal is to promote high-quality advanced communication services for all Californians, ensuring that underserved communities are prioritized in technology deployments. This change could significantly bolster efforts toward digital equity in the state.

Summary

Assembly Bill 2239, introduced by Assembly Member Bonta, aims to prohibit digital discrimination in access to broadband internet services in California. The bill seeks to ensure that internet service providers and related entities do not employ practices that differentially impact consumers based on race, ethnicity, color, religion, or national origin, thereby promoting equitable access to vital communication technologies. The legislation establishes definitions and guidelines for what constitutes digital discrimination, as well as mechanisms for enforcement by the Attorney General and other public attorneys through civil actions.

Sentiment

The sentiment around AB 2239 appears to be largely supportive among advocates for civil rights and access to technology, as it speaks directly to the injustices tied to digital inequality. Supporters argue that the bill is a necessary step to prevent the exploitation of marginalized groups in a crucial service area of modern life. However, potential opposition could arise from some internet service providers concerned about the implications this legislation may have on their competitive practices and operational flexibility.

Contention

While the bill's proponents champion it as a safeguard for vulnerable populations, critics may argue that it places undue regulation on private companies that could stifle innovation or lead to increased costs. The contention will likely center around the balance of ensuring equitable access without overregulating the competitive landscape of internet service provision in California. Any move toward enforcement will need to navigate these concerns delicately to maintain support across various stakeholder groups.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA SB822

Communications: broadband Internet access service.

CA AB2753

Communications: Digital Equity Bill of Rights.

CA AB537

Communications: wireless telecommunications and broadband facilities.

HI HB1472

Relating To Broadband Service.

CA SB460

Communications: broadband Internet access service: state agencies.