Crime

What You Need to Know About California’s New Sexual Assault Laws

Watching your tax dollars, elected officials and legislation that affects you.

Published

4 years ago

October 19, 2021

Isabelle Price

Word "Me too" typed on typewriter

Before the October 10 deadline to sign or veto bills passed by the Legislature, California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed several sexual assault bills into law.

They include Assembly Bill (AB) 453, AB 1171, AB 939 and Senate Bill (SB) 215.

AB 453, authored by Assemblymember Cristina Garcia (D- Bell Gardens), makes the act of non-consensually removing a condom, also known as “stealthing,” illegal.

Under this new law, stealthing would be considered a form of sexual battery. However, it does not criminalize it.

“We have stepped up in a major way in California & I hope other state legislatures follow suit,” tweeted Garcia. “But more importantly, I hope people will build on this & continue engaging in discussion around the continuum of consent.”

The governor’s office tweeted about the bill’s passing and what kind of legal actions can be taken given that it is still not technically a criminal act.

“With @AsmGarcia’s #AB453 signed, victims of stealthing will be able to take civil action against their perpetrators. By passing this bill, we are underlining the importance of consent,” read the tweet.

AB 1171, also authored by Garcia, will remove the distinction between rape and “spousal rape” in California law.

Before AB 1171 was signed into law, California was one of only nine states that still included the distinction between rape and spousal rape.

“Rape is Rape, & this bill makes it clear that a marriage license doesn’t change that. No more asking victims if they are married or not. TY to all the advocates who worked on getting this bill to @CAgovernor & pushing to get it signed,” Garcia tweeted.

SB 215, co-authored by Sen. Connie Leyva (D-Chino), will allow survivors of sexual assault to track and receive information regarding their sexual assault evidence kit.

Tracking will take place through a new online portal that allows survivors to access the SAFE-T database.

“As the author of SB 215, I am so proud that we are once again prioritizing and empowering rape survivors by making sure that they able to easily and privately find out where their rape kit is in the process,” Leyva said.

“A rape kit exam is invasive and retraumatizing, so survivors should absolutely be able to track their rape kit every step of the way. I would like to thank our amazing coalition of sponsors—District Attorney Nancy O’Malley, Joyful Heart Foundation and Natasha’s Justice Project—and supporters for testifying, Tweeting, writing and speaking out about the critical need for this legislation. With today’s signature by Governor Newsom, SB 215 will help to empower survivors, hold rapists accountable and strengthen public safety across California,” she continued.

AB 939 bans a survivor’s clothing from being used as evidence of consent in a sexual assault case.

The bill, also known as the Denim Day Act of 2021, is named for a day recognized during Sexual Assault Awareness Month in April. Denim Day focuses on amplifying the message that manner of dress does not equate to consent.

“I want to thank my legislative colleagues for their support on this important measure. AB 939 makes it clear that an outfit never provides consent, ever. To even consider whether a survivor’s manner of dress should be admitted as evidence of consent wrongly scrutinizes the actions of the survivor, instead of placing that scrutiny where it truly belongs — on the actions of the perpetrator,” said Assemblymember Sabrina Cervantes (D-Corona).

“Sexual assault is the most underreported and under-prosecuted type of crime. We must ensure that survivors are not subjected to a justice system that re-victimizes and re-traumatizes them and that our justice system protects them when they seek justice,” she added.

Isabelle Price

Posts by Isabelle Price

Up Next

Gov. Newsom Stands Firm on Mandates as State Reaches COVID-19 Milestone

Don't Miss

COMMENTARY: Together, We Can Save Our Water and Our Future

Isabelle Price

Click to comment

Activism

Oakland Post: Week of December 24 – 30, 2025

The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of – December 24 – 30, 2025

Published

5 days ago

December 25, 2025

Oakland Post

To enlarge your view of this issue, use the slider, magnifying glass icon or full page icon in the lower right corner of the browser window.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Alameda County

Oakland Council Expands Citywide Security Cameras Despite Major Opposition

In a 7-1 vote in favor of the contract, with only District 3 Councilmember Carroll Fife voting no, the Council agreed to maintain its existing network of 291 cameras and add 40 new “pan-tilt-zoom cameras.”

Published

1 week ago

December 21, 2025

Oakland Post

At the International Association of Chiefs of Police Conference, Flock Safety introduces new public safety technology – Amplified Intelligence, a suite of AI-powered tools designed to improve law enforcement investigations. Courtesy photo.

By Post Staff

The Oakland City Council this week approved a $2.25 million contract with Flock Safety for a mass surveillance network of hundreds of security cameras to track vehicles in the city.

In recent weeks hundreds of local residents have spoken against the camera system, raising concerns that data will be shared with immigration authorities and other federal agencies at a time when mass surveillance is growing across the country with little regard for individual rights.

The Flock network, supported by the Oakland Police Department, has the backing of residents and councilmembers who see it as an important tool to protect public safety.

“This system makes the Department more efficient as it allows for information related to disruptive/violent criminal activities to be captured … and allows for precise and focused enforcement,” OPD wrote in its proposal to City Council.

According to OPD, police made 232 arrests using data from Flock cameras between July 2024 and November of this year.

Based on the data, police say they recovered 68 guns, and utilizing the countywide system, they have found 1,100 stolen vehicles.

However, Flock’s cameras cast a wide net. The company’s cameras in Oakland last month captured license plate numbers and other information from about 1.4 million vehicles.

Speaking at Tuesday’s Council meeting, Fife was critical of her colleagues for signing a contract with a company that has been in the national spotlight for sharing data with federal agencies.

Flock’s cameras – which are automated license plate readers – have been used in tracking people who have had abortions, monitoring protesters, and aiding in deportation roundups.

“I don’t know how we get up and have several press conferences talking about how we are supportive of a sanctuary city status but then use a vendor that has been shown to have a direct relationship with (the U.S.) Border Control,” she said. “It doesn’t make sense to me.”

Several councilmembers who voted in favor of the contract said they supported the deal as long as some safeguards were written into the Council’s resolution.

“We’re not aiming for perfection,” said District 1 Councilmember Zac Unger. “This is not Orwellian facial recognition technology — that’s prohibited in Oakland. The road forward here is to add as many amendments as we can.”

Amendments passed by the Council prohibit OPD from sharing camera data with any other agencies for the purpose of “criminalizing reproductive or gender affirming healthcare” or for federal immigration enforcement. California state law also prohibits the sharing of license plate reader data with the federal government, and because Oakland’s sanctuary city status, OPD is not allowed to cooperate with immigration authorities.

A former member of Oakland’s Privacy Advisory Commission has sued OPD, alleging that it has violated its own rules around data sharing.

So far, OPD has shared Flock data with 50 other law enforcement agencies.