New CA Law Will Require Deadly Force to be "Necessary"
Under the new standard, prosecutors can also consider the actions both of officers and of the victim leading up to a deadly encounter, to determine whether the officer acted within the scope of law, policy and training.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom Monday signed Assembly Bill 392, creating what some have described as one of the toughest standards in the nation for when law enforcement officers can use deadly force. The new law will require that law enforcement use deadly force only when "necessary," instead of the current wording of when it is "reasonable."
Intense private negotiations and public outcry influenced the final language of the legislation, which will take effect on Jan. 1. New training will be required for all of the state's law enforcement officers. So it may not practically take effect for some time after January.
Under current law, prosecutors can only consider the moment lethal force was used when determining if an officer acted within the law. Did an officer reasonably believe his or her life or bystanders' lives were in danger in those seconds?
Under the new standard, prosecutors can also consider the actions both of officers and of the victim leading up to a deadly encounter, to determine whether the officer acted within the scope of law, policy and training. Opening up those tactics to scrutiny, supporters believe, will encourage departments to train officers in de-escalation and other strategies that could decrease the use of lethal force and provide a potential path to accountability when it is used, the Los Angeles Times reports.
Law enforcement groups vehemently opposed AB 392 when it was introduced. After months of negotiations, law enforcement groups, including the California State Sheriff's Assn. and the California Highway Patrol, unexpectedly dropped their opposition to AB 392 after it was amended to address their concerns. And a new bill was created to provide law enforcement officers with the necessary training.
Senate Bill 230, the training bill tied to AB 392, is stuck in committee in the Assembly in part because backers of AB 392 fear that language added to it weakens the new law and could undermine its intent. Some community groups object to wording that requires de-escalation only when its "feasible."
More Point of Law
Point of Law: The Limits of Electronic Searches
Can an individual be prosecuted for despicable criminal conduct based on evidence obtained in violation of the United States Constitution? Ultimately, the Ninth Circuit judges wrote, “In the circumstances of this case (United States v. Holcomb, 23-469 (9th Cir. 2025)), respect for the Constitution and the rule of law requires an answer of “no.”
Read More →
Trump Issues Order Cutting Federal Funding in Cashless Bail Jurisdictions
<strong>“</strong>Cashless bail policies allow dangerous individuals to immediately return to the streets and further endanger law-abiding, hard-working Americans because they know our laws will not be enforced,” the administration said.
Read More →Justice Department Sues Los Angeles Over Sanctuary Policies
The DOJ said in a press release that the “sanctuary city” policies of the City of Los Angeles are illegal under federal law.
Read More →
Understanding Officer-Created Jeopardy
Officers can be criminally prosecuted for using force when their actions led to escalation during contact with subjects.
Read More →
Point of Law: The Limitations of Search Warrants
In the Tenth Circuit case of Cuervo v. Sorenson, the Court ruled officers cannot deviate from the language of the warrant.
Read More →DOJ Dismisses Consent Decrees Affecting Louisville and Minneapolis Police
The Civil Rights Division will be taking all necessary steps to dismiss the Louisville and Minneapolis lawsuits with prejudice, to close the underlying investigations into the Louisville and Minneapolis police departments.
Read More →New Michigan Bill would Give Officers Civil Immunity in Self-Defense Cases
House Bill 4404 would create a presumption of civil immunity for individuals who are cleared criminally after using force in self-defense, shifting the burden of proof onto plaintiffs.
Read More →Seattle to Pay Police Captain $1 Million to Settle Lawsuit
Seattle police Capt. Eric Greening sued former Chief Adrian Diaz last year alleging that Diaz retaliated when Greening brought up concerns about racial and gender discrimination.
Read More →Washington Agencies Ordered to Not Delete Critical Facebook Contents
Jim Leighty, a local activist, filed two federal lawsuits last year claiming both agencies deleted or hid critical comments he had written below multiple posts, while keeping comments that were pro-police in nature.
Read More →Washington State Attorney General Sues Sheriff for Helping Immigration Enforcement
The lawsuit claims the Adams County Sheriff’s Office has illegally held people in custody based only on their immigration status, helped federal agents question people in custody, and given immigration officials confidential personal information.
Read More →