California lawmakers are back at it, arguing over how far the justice system should go in treating abuse as a core part of a defendant's story. It is a fight parked at the uncomfortable crossroads of survivor advocacy, judicial discretion and public safety, which helps explain why the issue keeps resurfacing after years of relatively quiet legislative skirmishes.
What AB 938 Would Change
According to the California Legislature, AB 938 would push California beyond its current rule that limits vacatur relief to nonviolent offenses. The measure would let judges hear an affirmative defense in violent-felony cases other than murder. If relief is granted, the arrest and conviction could be treated as though they never happened, with records sealed or destroyed and unpaid restitution, fines and fees wiped away.
Bonta And Survivors Say The Law Misses Real Trauma
In a March hearing transcript posted by CalMatters Digital Democracy, Assemblymember Mia Bonta said the bill is meant to listen to survivors and create a path to justice and healing.
Susan Bustamante, who told lawmakers about abuse she says was kept from her jury, has become the public face of that argument. She served decades in prison before then-Governor Jerry Brown commuted her sentence, and she was freed in 2018.
Why Prosecutors Are Digging In
Opponents have labeled AB 938 an absurd policy, warning it could trigger a wave of petitions and weaken accountability for serious violence. Supporters push back on that critique. KPBS Public Media reported that backers include at least 17 organizations, among them the San Francisco Public Defender's Office, and that supporters argue the proposal still leaves judges with a high bar to clear before any relief is granted.
