Los Angeles Assemblymember Rick Zbur says he wants to narrow the standards for justifiable homicide. Critics say he wants to make self-defense illegal.
Assembly Bill 1333 has provoked a great deal of debate since its introduction in late February.
In response to several states’ “stand-your-ground laws,” which permit people in certain cases to use deadly force in self-defense, Zbur’s bill seeks to codify certain circumstances when homicide “is not justifiable.” Those circumstances would include when the person was:
- Outside their home and knew that using deadly force could have been avoided by safely retreating;
- Engaging in mutual combat or knowingly provoking a person (though this provision has some exceptions).
Zbur, a Democrat, told me his proposal doesn’t run afoul with California’s “castle doctrine,” which allows people to use deadly force to defend themselves in their own home. Rather, it seeks to address gun violence, and the rising instances of armed vigilantism in the U.S.
- Zbur: “What this bill is focused on is someone who goes out in public, picks a fight — and when the victim responds — they shoot them and claim self-defense.”
There is evidence — including from a 2020 study by the research and policy think tank RAND Corporation and a 2022 analysis by the University of Oxford — that link stand-your-ground laws with increases in firearm homicides.
The bill would be similar to laws enacted in nearly a dozen states, including Nebraska, Minnesota and Hawaii, which require people to “disengage or deescalate” in lieu of taking lethal action, said Monisha Henley, senior vice president for government affairs for Everytown for Gun Safety, a sponsor of the measure.
Republicans, however, slammed the proposal: Assemblymember David Tangipa of Fresno told me the bill encroaches on the Second Amendment, and that it would allow the state to punish victims if they don’t “exhaust all options” and act within “the parameters of what the state wants them to do.”
- Tangipa: “We have situations where police have to react in the moment, and those are trained individuals. Now we’re asking people who are untrained to make decisions that could cost them their lives. … It doesn’t matter the (bill’s) intentions, it’s the implications at the end of the road.”
Assemblymember Tom Lackey of Palmdale, a former California Highway Patrol officer, called the proposal “ludicrous, dangerous and deplorable.”
Zbur said he is adding more “nuanced language” to the measure. A hearing has not yet been set for the bill.
CalMatters covers the Capitol: We have guides and stories to keep track of bills and your lawmakers; find out how well legislators are representing you; explore the Legislature’s record diversity; and how to make your voice heard.
Other Stories You Should Know
Newsom, fair-weather ally?
While speaking with conservative provocateur Charlie Kirk for the first episode of Gov. Gavin Newsom’s new podcast, the governor said the issue of transgender athletes competing in women’s sports was “deeply unfair.”
- Newsom, on the podcast: “I completely agree with you on that. … I revere sports and so the issue of fairness is completely legit.”
His comments quickly drew criticism from legislators on both sides of the political aisle, writes Alexei Koseff. Assemblymember Chris Ward, a San Diego Democrat and chairperson of the California Legislative LGBTQ Caucus, told Alexei: “We woke up incredibly sickened and disappointed…”
Meanwhile, Republican Assemblymember Bill Essayli of Corona said the governor’s statement was “all empty rhetoric.” Essayli urged Newsom on social media to support his bill that would ban transgender students from competing on teams of their gender identity.
Newsom, who has been rumored to be eyeing a bid for the presidency, has long positioned himself as a champion for LGBTQ rights. As San Francisco mayor, he issued marriage licenses for same-sex couples in 2004 before the U.S. Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage. Newsom also signed a law last year prohibiting schools to require staff to notify parents if a student identifies as LGBTQ, and proclaimed Nov. 20, 2024 as Transgender Day of Remembrance.
Important CalPERS decision for union reps
A Santa Ana cop’s multi-year battle with the state’s pension board to receive more money in retirement concluded last week when a California appeals court sided with the California Public Employees’ Retirement System.
As CalMatters’ Adam Ashton explains, Gerry Serrano retired in 2023 and made nearly $300,000 a year while he was on union leave — an income that was mostly based on his years of service as a police detective.
Serrano wanted this total compensation to count when determining his retirement income, which included pay for specific law enforcement work that he didn’t perform while he was a union leader. (Under California law, government agencies are required to allow people to take time off work to participate in union duties and business, “without loss of compensation or other benefits.”)
But the 4th District Court of Appeal ruled that Serrano’s pension can’t include the benefits he received for work he didn’t do while on leave as a labor representative. CalPERS praised the ruling, acknowledging how it could affect other public employees’ decisions to take union leave.
- Matthew Jacobs, CalPERS General Counsel, in a written statement: “This ruling reaffirms CalPERS stance that special extra pay bonuses to spike pensions won’t be tolerated.”
And lastly: Palm Springs airport upgrade
Palm Springs International Airport is set for a major $2.2 billion expansion, with plans to nearly double its gates and add new concourses. CalMatters Inland Empire reporter Deborah Brennan and video strategy director Robert Meeks have a video segment on how officials are looking to secure funding as part of our partnership with PBS SoCal. Watch it here.
SoCalMatters airs at 5:58 p.m. weekdays on PBS SoCal.
California Voices
CalMatters columnist Dan Walters: A report’s call for California to trim bureaucratic red tape in order to build critical infrastructure could end up in the discard bin like so many other governance reform proposals.
Local officials’ recent attacks on the state judiciary show a limited understanding of how public safety and justice are gained and preserved in our communities, writes Brett Alldredge, a retired judge who served on the Tulare County Superior Court bench.
Other things worth your time:
What does the CA resistance look like in a second Trump administration? // The Sacramento Bee
CA sues Trump administration over cuts to teacher training grants // Los Angeles Daily News
Surge in CA electric vehicle sales could hurt state’s fight against pollution // San Francisco Chronicle
With rain on the way, CA’s water managers are ‘waiting with bated breath’ // The New York Times
Avian flu cases continue to rise across the San Joaquin Valley, and it’s not just among birds // Fresnoland
Searing audit finds LA failed to properly track billions in homelessness spending // LAist
Medicaid cuts could be ‘highly consequential’ for Valley healthcare, experts say // The Fresno Bee
San Jose mayor eyes policy that would allow trespassing charges against homeless residents // The Mercury News
Oroville seeks to declare itself ‘non-sanctuary city’ for ICE arrests // Oroville Mercury-Register
Rodent for dinner? CA officials urge residents to eat invasive nutria // The Guardian