California rings in the new year with new laws

(CN) — Californians will find one of the biggest changes to state law in the new year in their shopping bags.

Or, rather, the change will be their shopping bag.

A bill passed in 2024 — and which becomes effective Jan. 1 — will remove plastic bags from grocery stores. The heavy plastic bags, a staple for stores in the Golden State since a 2014 law passed, will give way to canvas or paper bags. Some exemptions exist, like bags used for unwrapped food.

It’s a change that Raley’s, a supermarket chain with 121 stores in Northern California and Nevada, has been working on since April.

“The transition has been happening for some time and over the last number of months as we’ve worked through the remaining reusable plastic bags,” said Ashley Shick, communications and public affairs director with Bashas, a division of The Raley’s Companies, in a statement to Courthouse News. “Stores are only ordering and utilizing the new paper bags. We have not heard any feedback, good or bad, from consumers.”

Save Mart, with 78 stores in California, is another chain that must comply with the new law.

“In compliance with evolving California regulations and our commitment to sustainability, The Save Mart Companies will transition to offering only paper bags to customers beginning Jan. 1, 2026,” said Don Williams, with Glodow Nead Communications, in a statement to Courthouse News.

Rachael Salcido — the inaugural Stephen C. McCaffrey endowed law professor at the University of the Pacific, McGeorge School of Law — said excitement grew when the 2014 plastic-bag ban passed.

However, a study found that those thicker, supposedly reusable bags were only used for minutes and could sit in landfills for 1,000 years.

“We found that the initial law didn’t work,” said the scholar of environmental and natural resources law in a phone interview with Courthouse News. “They were, in fact, single-use bags.”

Laws and lawsuits

The disappearance of plastic bags from California grocery stores might be the most visible change people see in 2026, but it won’t be the only one. Lawmakers wrote thousands of bills in 2025, with many making it to Governor Gavin Newsom’s desk. Newsom signed hundreds of them. Barring an urgency clause that makes them effective upon signing, or a date in the bill specifying when they become effective, the new laws go into effect Jan. 1.

One of the most high-profile bills was Senate Bill 627, called the No Secret Police Act. Written by Democratic state Senator Scott Wiener of San Francisco, it targets federal immigration agents who have worn masks while detaining people suspected of being in the country without authorization. The bill also prevents local law enforcement from masking except in certain circumstances. State authorities are exempt.

Wiener has said the law passes constitutional muster.

“Starting on Thursday, ICE agents who terrorize California communities while covering their faces will be in violation of California law and subject to civil and criminal liability,” the senator said in a statement. “There is no legitimate reason for ICE or any law enforcement officer to cover their faces while conducting normal operations, and doing so undermines public safety and erodes trust in law enforcement.”

First Assistant U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli has said the state lacks jurisdiction to interfere with federal law enforcement. He’s advised federal authorities to ignore the law.

The Trump administration has sued in federal court over the legislation.

Another bill that drew intense scrutiny was Assembly Bill 715, which will create an Office of Civil Rights under the Government Operations Agency, along with an antisemitism prevention coordinator. Local educational agencies must investigate and take action if they know or should have known instructional materials were used to violate antidiscrimination laws. Additionally, the law also requires instruction to be factually accurate.

A group of parents and teachers in November filed suit against the bill. They’ve claimed the bill doesn’t define essential terms like “antisemitism.”

Newsom signed a handful of other bills that also affect the classroom.

Assembly Bill 495 drew opposition as it wound through the legislative process. The main reason is because of a controversial provision that enables a joint guardianship between a guardian and custodial parent.

Its author — Assemblymember Celeste Rodriguez, a San Fernando Democrat — has pointed to federal immigration action as a need for the legislation. It would provide stability if a child’s parent is detained.

The California Family Council opposed the bill, as did the National Center for Law & Policy and Protect Our Kids. Opponents argued it would give unvetted adults authority over children.

The California Family Council also opposed Assembly Bill 727, which requires public schools that have seventh through 12th grade to issue student ID cards that have contact information for the Trevor Project’s LGBTQ+ suicide hotline.

The author — Assemblymember Mark Gonzalez, a Los Angeles Democrat — has said LGBTQ+ students face bullying and discrimination, and they need resources like the hotline.

The council said the bill posed a threat to religious liberty and parental rights.

Large-language legislation

The specter of artificial intelligence has led to legislation over the past few years. While Newsom vetoed a high-profile AI bill of Wiener’s in 2024, a different version of that bill passed this year.

Senate Bill 53 requires large AI developers to create safety frameworks, release transparency reports and report critical incidents to the state. It also makes whistleblower protections for employees, as well as establishes CalCompute — a public cloud platform for safe and equitable AI research.

Newsom also signed a handful of election-related legislation

Assembly Bill 5 — written by Assemblymember Marc Berman, a Menlo Park Democrat — requires elections officials to reveal vote totals by the 13th day after an election.

The bill stemmed from the 2024 general election, which had two close congressional races that took weeks until clear winners were known.

Senate Bill 398 — written by state Senator Tom Umberg, a Santa Ana Democrat — prohibits someone from paying or offering to pay someone money or something of value in exchange for them registering to vote or voting.

The bill defined “other valuable consideration” as the chance to win a lottery or similar contest.

Umberg has pointed to America PAC’s October 2024 announcement that it would hold a $1 million lottery for people in swing states who signed a petition supporting the First and Second amendments.

Assemblymember Alex Lee, a San Jose Democrat, had his cat declawing bill pass into law. Assembly Bill 867 prohibits someone from declawing a cat, unless the person is a veterinarian and the procedure is required for a therapeutic purpose.