California's Assembly Public Safety Committee convened on July 1, 2025, to discuss Senate Bill 690, a proposed legislation aimed at curbing a surge of lawsuits that exploit the California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA). Senator Anna Caballero presented the bill, emphasizing its necessity to protect California businesses from what she described as predatory legal tactics that threaten jobs and innovation.

Senator Caballero highlighted that a small number of trial lawyers have filed thousands of lawsuits against over 1,700 businesses, claiming violations of CIPA for standard online practices like using website analytics and cookies. These lawsuits, she argued, are financially devastating, with penalties reaching $5,000 per violation, leading many businesses to settle rather than face costly litigation.

The senator pointed out that California already has robust privacy protections through the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), which was designed to give consumers control over their data. She argued that the current lawsuits do not serve to enhance consumer privacy but rather exploit outdated laws for financial gain. Caballero proposed amendments to the bill to create a rebuttable presumption in CIPA, allowing businesses to defend against claims by proving no harm was done.

Supporters of SB 690, including representatives from the Los Angeles Times and privacy law experts, echoed the senator's concerns. They argued that the bill would provide much-needed clarity and protect businesses from meritless lawsuits that threaten their survival and the integrity of California's news ecosystem.

However, opposition voices raised significant concerns about the bill's implications for consumer privacy. Advocates from organizations like the Dolores Huerta Foundation and AJ SoCal warned that SB 690 could enable companies to collect sensitive personal data without adequate oversight, potentially endangering vulnerable populations, including survivors of domestic violence and marginalized communities.

The committee's discussions underscored the tension between protecting businesses from litigation and ensuring robust consumer privacy protections. As the bill moves forward, it will be crucial to balance these competing interests to safeguard both economic vitality and individual rights in California. The committee plans to revisit the bill, allowing further time for stakeholder engagement and refinement of its provisions.