Senate Committee Votes on Assembly Bill 379 to Combat Human Trafficking

The Senate Appropriations Committee convened on July 7, 2025, in Room 200 of the O Street Building to address 38 measures on its agenda. Notably, Senator Dolly was absent from the meeting. The committee planned to vote on Assembly Bill (AB) 379, introduced by Assemblymember Schultz, while the remaining bills would be moved to the suspense file without presentations from their authors.

The meeting commenced with the establishment of a quorum, allowing the committee to proceed with its agenda. The first item discussed was AB 64 by Assemblymember Pacheco, which was moved to the suspense file after no public testimony was offered in support or opposition. This pattern continued with several other bills, including AB 343, AB 352, AB 86, and AB 399, all of which were similarly moved to suspense without objection.

A more detailed discussion arose with AB 258, also by Assemblymember Connolly, which proposed an increase in funding for fairs in California. A representative from the Western Fairs Association testified in support, highlighting the need for increased resources. The committee moved this bill to suspense as well.

The focal point of the meeting was AB 379, which aims to impose felony penalties for the solicitation of minors by adults and establish a survivor support fund for victims of human trafficking. Assemblymember Schultz emphasized the bill's importance in combating human trafficking and protecting vulnerable youth. The bill received strong support from various organizations and officials, including the San Diego Mayor and the California Police Chiefs Association.

However, opposition emerged from the Immigrant Legal Resource Center (ILRC), which raised concerns about the potential for increased ICE detentions and the negative impact on immigrant communities. The ILRC argued that the bill could lead to significant costs for the state due to family separations and legal consequences for individuals, particularly those with DACA status.

Additional opposition came from representatives of the Sex Worker Outreach Project, who criticized the bill's vague language and potential fiscal irresponsibility, suggesting it could lead to increased costs for the judicial system.

The committee concluded the meeting with a focus on the fiscal implications of AB 379, with further discussions anticipated as the bill moves forward. The overall progression of the meeting highlighted the committee's commitment to addressing human trafficking while balancing fiscal responsibilities and community concerns.