Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Health Care Regulation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Assembly approves SB 351 to strengthen enforcement against non‑physician interference in medical practices

California State Assembly · August 29, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

SB 351 passed the Assembly after presenters said it would give the attorney general authority to act when private equity or non‑physician owners interfere with medical decision‑making and would invalidate gag and restrictive contract clauses that silence clinicians.

Assemblymember Patel presented SB 351 on behalf of Senator Cabaldon as a targeted update to California law aimed at strengthening enforcement against non‑physician interference in medical and dental practice.

"This bill is not about vilifying private equity investment," Assemblymember Patel said. "Private capital has played an important role in expanding access ... but as private equity activity in health care grows ... it's essential that California's guardrails keep pace." He told members SB 351 would allow the attorney general to step in when financial interests cross the line and would protect providers by invalidating contracts that muzzle them with noncompete or gag clauses.

Supporters framed the bill as protecting the doctor‑patient relationship while preserving legitimate private investment that improves access and innovation. Assemblymembers indicated amendments removed opposition and maintained stakeholder input. The clerk reported the vote as I 61, No 0; the measure passed on the Assembly floor.

Floor remarks emphasized enforcement tools and clinician protections; proponents said SB 351 would modernize the state's ability to address situations where financial arrangements may improperly influence clinical decisions. The bill’s proponents did not cite specific statutory code sections on the floor; they described the change as strengthening enforcement of existing California law that limits non‑physician interference in medical decisions.

After passage, the Assembly moved SB 351 forward for any remaining steps required by the legislative process.