California lawmakers are moving to redraw the line between health care and immigration enforcement, advancing a pair of bills that would limit how federal immigration officers operate inside hospitals and how detained patients are tracked. The twin bills, SB 915 from Sen. Caroline Menjivar and SB 1323 from Sen. Susan Rubio, cleared key Senate committees this month and are now headed to the Senate Appropriations Committee. Supporters say the proposals would safeguard access to doctors, lawyers, and family members, while hospital groups warn the changes could leave staff stuck between patient advocacy and federal authority.
What the bills would change
SB 915 would require health care facilities to verify and document the identity and agency of any immigration officer who accompanies a patient, ask those officers to step out during medical examinations and patient-care discussions, bar them from making or influencing medical decisions or serving as interpreters, and prohibit blackout policies that register detained patients under aliases. Backers and advocacy partners describe these steps as an attempt to protect patient privacy and clinical judgment while still allowing hospitals to address legitimate safety concerns.
SB 1323 focuses on communication and continuity of care. It would require providers to inform staff and relevant volunteers how to respond when a detained patient asks that family or a designated support person be notified, and would require facilities to post notices explaining visitation and access policies. As outlined by California Pan‑Ethnic Health Network, the measures also call for discharge planning aimed at maintaining continuity of care once patients are returned to detention.
The case that helped push lawmakers
Reporting by KFF Health News highlighted cases in which families and attorneys could not locate hospitalized immigration detainees, including one involving Julio César Peña. Peña was held at a Victorville hospital for nearly two weeks, guarded and reportedly shackled to his bed, while his family and attorneys say they were kept from knowing where he was. He later suffered a seizure and died on Feb. 25, according to the outlet’s reporting. Supporters of SB 915 and SB 1323 cite cases like Peña’s as evidence that hospitals need clearer rules so clinicians can focus on treatment without immigration enforcement shaping what happens at the bedside.
Hospitals push back
The California Hospital Association has told lawmakers it is “opposed unless amended,” arguing that SB 915’s documentation requirements and limits on blackout policies could effectively turn hospital workers into go-betweens with federal officers and introduce new operational or safety risks. In testimony and in press accounts, hospital representatives have urged caution, saying staff should not be expected to police federal agents and warning that the proposed rules might create murky obligations in already tense clinical situations. At the committee hearing, the association’s vice president for state advocacy said the group wants to “ensure the bill strikes the right balance,” a concern that some physician groups and safety officials have echoed.
Where the bills stand now
Both SB 915 and SB 1323 cleared the Senate Health Committee on April 15 and later won approval in the Senate Judiciary Committee on April 21, sending the measures to the Senate Appropriations Committee for fiscal review. Official vote records for SB 915 and SB 1323 are available through California Legislative Information and California Legislative Information. Supporters describe the upcoming Appropriations hearing as the next big hurdle, while hospital groups and some legislators continue to press for amendments addressing day-to-day operations inside facilities.
Legal trade-offs and the practical test
Backers portray the bills as closing a loophole left by last year’s patient protections, which did not cover people already in Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody. Critics counter that requiring staff to document officers and ask them to leave exam rooms could trigger tense confrontations, delay care, or escalate conflicts in high-stress situations.
Sen. Menjivar has argued that “these are actions that have no place in health care, and it is a clear violation of the patients' rights,” framing the legislation as a patient-safety measure rather than an immigration fight. The Senate Appropriations Committee will decide whether the proposals advance to the Senate floor, where any approved versions would still need final votes in both chambers and the governor’s signature before becoming law.
