Senate adopts 338-page redistricting amendments after heated debate over urgency and process

The California State Senate on Aug. 18 adopted large, published amendments to AB 604 that replace the bill’s text and advance mid‑decade congressional map changes after hours of floor debate over procedure and urgency.

Senators debated whether the amendments — which opponents said amount to a 338‑page replacement of a previously short bill — were properly published and whether invoking an urgency clause met the constitutional requirement that an immediate threat to public peace, health or safety exist. The chamber ultimately voted to adopt the amendments, 27 to 10.

The issue mattered because the amendments would allow voters to consider a different approach to congressional redistricting than the one enacted by the California Citizens Redistricting Commission. Opponents said the changes bypassed the commission’s public process and were rushed onto the floor without adequate time for senators and the public to review the full text.

Senator Strickland argued the amendments were improper and premature, saying, "This amendment has no immediate threat to public peace, health, or safety as required by Article 4, Section 8(d) of our constitution," and urging senators to reject the urgency justification. Senator Strickland raised an appeal of the presiding officer’s ruling on germaneness during the debate.

Senator McGuire, the president pro tempore, defended the process and the decision to move forward with published amendments on the floor, saying the amendments had been published and the body was following the established practice of taking action after publication.

Other senators pressed different points: Senator Alvarado Gill asked which "equal protections" the urgency clause claimed were at risk; Senator Valadares and others criticized the maps in the amendments as fracturing communities and called for more public review. Senator Ochoa Bog argued the amendments waived standards in Article 11 that protect geographic and community integrity.

Procedural motions tied to the redistricting work also passed. The majority moved and the Senate approved suspending joint rule 62(a) to permit committee hearings on related measures and to allow the committee process to receive the published amendments and maps. Several separate suspensions to permit informational hearings on related constitutional amendments and companion bills were approved on roll calls recorded 27–10.

After extended debate and multiple points of order and appeals, the chamber proceeded to roll call on adoption of the amendments. The clerk recorded 27 ayes and 10 noes; the presiding officer declared the amendments adopted.

What happens next: because the amendments were adopted on the floor, related committee hearings were scheduled so members of the public and the committees can review the maps and take testimony. Senators said the bills and map language will continue through the committee process this week, and the Senate president announced the chamber will reconvene for further action on Thursday.

Ending note: Senators on both sides warned that more debate is likely to follow in committees and on the floor in coming days. Supporters argued the amendments are necessary to respond to actions in other states and to preserve California’s electoral interests; opponents said the map changes run counter to voter expectations about independent redistricting and that the public deserves more time to review the proposal.