Skip to main content
Independent and nonpartisan. SaveYourState is a civic information resource. It is not a government website and is not affiliated with any government agency, party, or campaign.

California · 2025–26 Regular Session · Senate Bill

SB 325: Cellular telephones: communications interceptions.

Did not advance Official data

  1. Introduced
  2. In committee
  3. Passed one chamber
  4. Passed both chambers
  5. Enacted
  6. Did not advance

Last official action: ·Record last updated:

Plain-language summary

SB 325 is a senate bill introduced in the California Senate on February 11, 2025. According to its official title, it concerns: Cellular telephones: communications interceptions. Primary sponsor: Roger Niello (R). Most recent recorded action (February 2, 2026): Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 56.

Generated automatically from the official title, sponsor list, and status record only. It does not characterize the bill’s purpose or effects. How summaries are written

Official summary

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

Existing law makes a person who, among other things, intercepts, receives, or assists in intercepting or receiving, a communication transmitted between cellular radio telephones or between a cellular radio telephone and a landline telephone guilty of a crime, unless consented to by all parties to the communications. Under existing law, subject to specified exceptions, a person who manufactures, assembles, sells, or offers for sale, advertises for sale, possesses, transports, imports, or furnishes to another person a device that is primarily or exclusively designed or intended for eavesdropping upon the communication of another person, in violation of the prohibition described above is punishable by a fine not exceeding $2,500, by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or in the state prison, or by both that fine and imprisonment.

This bill would make nonsubstantive, technical changes to that latter existing provision.

Sponsors

Sponsors by party (alphabetical): Republican 1

NameRolePartyChamberDistrict
Roger NielloPrimary sponsorRepublicanSenate6

“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. Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 56.
  2. Referred to Com. on RLS.
  3. From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 14.
  4. Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.

Sources

  1. California Legislative Information — pubinfo database export
  2. Official bill page