SB 50: Connected devices: device protection requests.

Official summary

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

Existing law authorizes a court to issue a restraining order to a person to prevent abuse, as specified, based on reasonable proof of a past act or acts of abuse. Existing law authorizes the order to be issued solely on the affidavit or testimony of the person requesting the restraining order.

Existing law requires a manufacturer of a connected device to equip the device with a reasonable security feature or features that are appropriate to the nature and function of the device, appropriate to the information it may collect, contain, or transmit, and designed to protect the device and information contained in the device from unauthorized access, destruction, use, modification, or disclosure.

This bill would authorize a survivor, as defined, or a designated representative of a survivor, to submit a device protection request to an account manager, as defined, seeking to terminate a perpetrator’s access to a connected device or associated user account. The bill would define “survivor” for these purposes to mean an individual who has had specified criminal acts committed or allegedly committed against them or who cares for another individual against whom those criminal acts have been committed or allegedly committed, as provided. The bill would require an account manager, within 2 business days of receiving a complete device protection request, to terminate or disable the perpetrator’s access to the connected device or user account, or to inform the survivor, in a clear and conspicuous manner, of any methods to reset the device to factory settings or a similar state that removes all account holders, as provided. The bill would specify the requirements for a device protection request and would impose certain requirements on an account manager in processing a request. By providing that a device protection request may include a copy of a signed affidavit, the bill would expand the crime of perjury, and thus impose a state-mandated local program.

This bill would require the account manager to clearly describe the process to submit a device protection request on their internet website or mobile application and would prohibit the account manager from providing specified information to the perpetrator. The bill would require an account manager and any officer, director, employee, vendor, or agent thereof to treat any information submitted by a survivor or a designated representative of a survivor as confidential and securely dispose of the information, as provided.

This bill would authorize enforcement of these provisions by injunction or civil penalty in any court action by any person injured by a violation of those provisions, the Attorney General, a district attorney, county counsel, a city attorney, or a city prosecutor, against an account manager or perpetrator, as provided. The bill would prohibit a waiver of these prohibitions and would declare that these provisions are severable.

Existing law authorizes a court to issue an ex parte order for, among other things, disturbing the peace of the other party. Existing law provides that disturbing the peace of the other party may be committed directly or indirectly, including through the use of a third party, and by any method or through any means including, but not limited to, telephone, online accounts, text messages, internet-connected devices, or other electronic technologies.

Sponsors

Sponsors by party (alphabetical): Democratic 1

“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. October 13, 2025Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 676, Statutes of 2025.
2. October 13, 2025Approved by the Governor.
3. September 16, 2025Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 3 p.m.
4. September 9, 2025Assembly amendments concurred in. (Ayes 40. Noes 0. Page 2708.) Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.
5. September 8, 2025In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.
6. September 8, 2025Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 79. Noes 0. Page 3002.) Ordered to the Senate.
7. September 3, 2025Ordered to third reading.
8. September 3, 2025Read third time and amended.
9. September 3, 2025Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
10. September 2, 2025Read second time and amended. Ordered to second reading.
11. August 29, 2025From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 11. Noes 0.) (August 29).
12. August 20, 2025August 20 set for first hearing. Placed on APPR. suspense file.