California 2025-2026 Regular Session

California Assembly Bill AB394

Introduced
2/3/25  
Refer
2/18/25  
Report Pass
3/24/25  
Refer
3/25/25  
Report Pass
3/27/25  
Refer
3/28/25  
Report Pass
4/2/25  
Refer
4/2/25  
Report Pass
4/10/25  
Refer
4/21/25  
Report Pass
4/22/25  
Refer
4/24/25  
Refer
4/30/25  
Report Pass
5/23/25  
Engrossed
6/2/25  
Refer
6/3/25  
Refer
6/11/25  
Report Pass
7/2/25  
Refer
7/2/25  
Report Pass
7/16/25  

Caption

Public transportation providers.

Impact

The proposed changes would amend Sections 527.8 of the Code of Civil Procedure and 243.3 of the Penal Code, impacting state laws relating to harassment and violence in public transit environments. Notably, the bill facilitates the enforcement of temporary restraining orders (TROs) across all public transit systems, which means that if any threats or incidents occur, law enforcement agencies would have clearer authority to act. The bill emphasizes the need for employers to protect the safety of their employees in transit roles and acknowledges the responsibility of public transit systems in maintaining a secure work environment.

Summary

Assembly Bill No. 394, introduced by Assembly Member Wilson, aims to enhance the protections for public transportation providers, employees, and contractors from unlawful violence and harassment. The bill expands the current definition of battery to include actions against public transportation providers’ employees and contractors, thereby broadening the scope of existing criminal penalties associated with battery. This move ensures that anyone who commits such acts, knowing the victim is fulfilling their duties, could face fines and imprisonment.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding AB 394 appears largely supportive, especially from those advocating for employee safety in public transportation. Proponents argue that the bill will equip transit workers with necessary protections in response to increasing incidents of violence and harassment they face on the job. However, there is an underlying concern about implementation costs and the potential for creating an overreaching legal framework that may infringe on individual's rights, hinting at a balancing act between safety and freedom.

Contention

Opposition might stem from worries regarding the bill’s broad definitions and the implications of increased penalties. Critics could argue that the expansion of the battery definition might lead to the criminalization of minor disputes that do not warrant severe repercussions. Moreover, the enforcement of temporary restraining orders across public transit systems could raise concerns about the proper training and resources available to law enforcement to handle such sensitive matters effectively.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Previously Filed As

CA SB428

Temporary restraining orders and protective orders: employee harassment.

CA SB553

Occupational safety: workplace violence: restraining orders and workplace violence prevention plan.

CA AB36

Domestic violence protective orders: possession of a firearm.

CA AB2824

Battery: public transportation provider.

CA AB3278

Transportation: omnibus bill.

CA AB819

Crimes: public transportation: fare evasion.

CA SB2

Firearms.

CA AB2499

Employment: unlawful discrimination and paid sick days: victims of violence.

CA AB3060

Pupil transportation: transportation network companies: Public Utilities Commission: safety standards: exemptions.

CA SB1031

San Francisco Bay area: local revenue measure: transportation improvements.

Similar Bills

CA SB428

Temporary restraining orders and protective orders: employee harassment.

CA SB553

Occupational safety: workplace violence: restraining orders and workplace violence prevention plan.

CA AB824

Protective orders: firearms and ammunition.

CA AB611

Safe at Home program: homeowners’ associations.

CA AB1692

Judiciary omnibus.