AB 1537: Peace officers: secondary employment.

Official summary

Legislative Counsel’s Digest (official, as of the latest version). Written by nonpartisan legislative staff; reproduced verbatim.

Existing law provides that every executive or ministerial officer, employee, or appointee of the State of California, or any county or city therein, or any political subdivision thereof, who knowingly asks, receives, or agrees to receive any emolument, gratuity, or reward, or any promise thereof excepting such as may be authorized by law for doing an official act, is guilty of a misdemeanor. Existing law exempts from that offense certain employment by a peace officer while off duty, as specified. Existing law also provides that a peace officer shall not be prohibited from engaging in other employment while off duty, as specified.

This bill would, notwithstanding those provisions, prohibit certain peace officers from engaging in any form of secondary employment, including contract based or as an individual contractor, that involves engaging in arresting, detaining, transporting, or deporting individuals pursuant to federal or out-of-state immigration laws. The bill would provide that failure to comply with this provision may constitute, for certain purposes, an act of serious misconduct and that it is grounds for decertification as a peace officer. The bill would require certain peace officers to report to their employing law enforcement agency any conditional offer of secondary employment relating to immigration enforcement. The bill would require the law enforcement agency to maintain specified records related to secondary employment. By imposing additional duties on local law enforcement agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would also explicitly state that these records related to secondary employment of certain peace officers are public records for the purposes of the California Public Records Act.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Sponsors

Sponsors by party (alphabetical): Democratic 15

“Support” is shown only as formal sponsorship recorded by the legislature. Roll-call votes are available on the official bill page.

Recent official actions

1. September 30, 2026Vetoed by Governor.
2. September 9, 2026Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 1 p.m.
3. August 30, 2026Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 46. Noes 22. Page 6909.).
4. August 30, 2026In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending.
5. August 30, 2026Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 27. Noes 11.).
6. August 24, 2026Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
7. August 21, 2026Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading.
8. August 20, 2026Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
9. August 19, 2026Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading.
10. August 13, 2026Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
11. August 13, 2026From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 5. Noes 2.) (August 13).
12. August 3, 2026In committee: Referred to APPR. suspense file.