SB 1234: Dependency: fentanyl use.

Official summary

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

Existing law establishes the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which may adjudge children to be dependents of the court under certain circumstances, including when the child suffered or there is a substantial risk that the child will suffer serious physical harm, or a parent fails to provide the child with adequate food, clothing, shelter, or medical treatment. Existing law requires a social worker who has cause to believe that a child meets the requirements to be adjudged a dependent of the court to immediately conduct an investigation to determine whether child welfare services should be offered to the family and whether proceedings in the juvenile court should be commenced. Existing law authorizes a court to make any reasonable orders to the parents or guardians of the child as the court deems necessary and proper.

This bill would require a social worker, if an investigation involves an allegation that a parent or guardian has used or is under the influence of fentanyl or other opioids, to document whether the risk of fentanyl or opioid exposure to the child was specifically assessed, as specified. The bill would also require a juvenile court that finds a risk of fentanyl use, as specified, by a parent or guardian to order the parent or guardian to submit to testing for fentanyl. If the court finds a risk of fentanyl use, the bill would require the case plan for the parent or guardian to include certain resources, including, among others, information on the proper storage of controlled substances and prescription medications. By imposing additional duties on county social workers, this bill would create a state-mandated local program.

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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Sponsors

Sponsors by party (alphabetical): Democratic 1 · Republican 12

“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. August 13, 2026August 13 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.
2. August 5, 2026August 5 set for first hearing. Placed on suspense file.
3. July 2, 2026Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
4. July 1, 2026From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 0.) (June 30).
5. June 16, 2026From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on HUM. S. (Ayes 12. Noes 0.) (June 16). Re-referred to Com. on HUM. S.
6. June 8, 2026From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on JUD.
7. May 18, 2026Referred to Coms. on JUD. and HUM. S.
8. April 30, 2026In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.
9. April 30, 2026Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 36. Noes 0. Page 4111.) Ordered to the Assembly.
10. April 22, 2026Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
11. April 21, 2026From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 4. Noes 0. Page 3955.) (April 20).
12. April 15, 2026From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on HUMAN S. (Ayes 11. Noes 0. Page 3869.) (April 14). Re-referred to Com. on HUMAN S.