Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the State Federal Litigation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Assembly approves up to $25 million to fund state litigation against federal actions
Summary
The California Assembly voted to authorize up to $25 million for the state Department of Justice to pursue litigation challenging federal executive actions; the bill passed after debate and a failed amendment to bar use of funds for defense of state or local officials.
The California State Assembly on Jan. 16, 2025 approved Senate Bill 1, authorizing up to $25,000,000 to support state legal actions challenging unlawful or unconstitutional actions by the federal government. The measure passed on a recorded vote, 57-17, and was ordered sent for enrollment to the Senate.
Supporters said the appropriation is a precaution to protect Californians if the federal administration withholds funds or issues unlawful executive actions. “We cannot, and we will not, stand idly by while the Trump administration breaks the law or violates the US Constitution,” Assemblymember Gabriel said while opening debate on the bill.
The bill is a budget appropriation intended to give the Attorney General resources to litigate on behalf of the state; Assemblymember Gabriel told colleagues the authorization is “up to $25,000,000” and clarified that the money would be available for litigation and includes reporting and transparency provisions. He said the state is not spending $25 million immediately but is authorizing the funding to defend Californians and their access to federal programs and constitutional protections.
Opponents focused on scope and targets of the funding. Assemblymember De Maio offered an amendment to bar use of funds to provide legal defense to state or local politicians or Senate-confirmed officers if the federal government brought charges against them; he argued taxpayers should not underwrite such defense. De Maio said, “we shouldn't force taxpayers into footing the bill for criminal defense and legal defense attorneys, for politicians.”
The Assembly voted to lay De Maio’s amendment on the table; the clerk recorded the tally as Ayes 52, Nos 17. After further debate from members across the political spectrum — who described concerns about federal freezes on federal programs, emergency assistance, and rule-of-law risks — the Assembly approved SB 1, final tally Ayes 57, Nos 17.
Several members who supported the bill cited recent executive actions and court filings as justification for preparing state legal responses. Supporters pointed to previous successful state litigation against federal actions and said the appropriation gives the Attorney General capacity to defend federal funding streams that support schools, health care, housing vouchers and other programs in California.
The Assembly’s actions: the amendments offered to limit the bill’s scope were laid on the table; the bill then passed and was transmitted for enrollment. The bill is a budget measure and takes effect immediately under the read-bill rule for urgency budget items.
Votes at a glance: vote to lay De Maio amendment on the table — Ayes 52, Nos 17; final passage of SB 1 — Ayes 57, Nos 17.
The Assembly sent SB 1 to the Senate for enrollment immediately after the vote; supporters said the funding will be used only as necessary and with reporting requirements included in the measure.
