SB-524
Justice & Public Safety

Law enforcement agencies: artificial intelligence.

Enrolled
CA
2025-2026 Regular Session
0
0
Track

Key Takeaways

  • Establishes a policy requiring per-page AI use disclosure and the officer's signature.
  • Requires retention of the first AI draft for as long as the final report is kept.
  • Mandates an audit trail showing who used AI and the input video or audio.
  • Restricts contracted vendors to use data only for LEA purposes or court orders.

Summary

Senator Arreguín, with Assembly Member Schultz as a coauthor, advances a measure that would require law enforcement agencies to adopt a formal policy governing the use of artificial intelligence in official reports, mandating per-page disclosure of AI involvement and a responsible officer’s signature on the final document, while preserving the first AI draft and creating an auditable record of AI usage. The proposal applies to any agency employing peace officers across state and local government, and it is described as a state-mandated local program with a reimbursement pathway if costs are found to be mandated.

Core provisions require that every official report identify the specific AI tools used on each page and include the statement that the report was written with artificial intelligence, alongside the officer’s or agency member’s signature verifying the contents. If AI is used to prepare an official report, the first AI draft must be retained for as long as the official report is retained, and AI-generated drafts are not themselves sworn statements. An audit trail must log the identity of the user who operated the AI and, where available, the video and audio inputs used to generate the narrative. Contracted vendors may not share or use agency data beyond the agency’s purposes or court orders, but may access data for troubleshooting, bias mitigation, accuracy improvement, or system refinement. Definitions set boundaries for terms such as “artificial intelligence,” “first draft,” “official report,” “contracted vendor,” and “law enforcement agency.”

Implementation hinges on local agencies adopting policies that incorporate these elements, updating standard operating procedures and training, and establishing IT capabilities to capture disclosures, signatures, and audit trails; retention practices for first drafts must align with the duration of the official report’s retention. The measure contemplates potential costs to local agencies, with reimbursement governed by the state’s mandate framework if the Commission on State Mandates determines costs are mandated by the state, though there is no explicit funding within the bill. Enforcement provisions are not specified in the text, with oversight anticipated to occur through existing mandate reimbursement processes and internal compliance mechanisms.

Contextual considerations include how AI-disclosed, signed official reports and the accompanying audit trails may affect evidentiary authentication, discovery, and public-records practices, as well as the data governance implications for contracted vendors. Stakeholders include law enforcement agencies, district attorneys, courts, and technology providers, all of whom would navigate new policy requirements, retention obligations, and contract modifications. The bill does not specify an effective date or phase-in schedule, leaving implementation details to standard statutory practice. Overall, the measure codifies governance around AI-assisted report-writing and data handling in policing, emphasizing disclosure, traceability, and vendor controls.

Key Dates

Vote on Senate Floor
Senate Floor
Vote on Senate Floor
Unfinished Business SB524 Arreguín et al. Concurrence
Vote on Assembly Floor
Assembly Floor
Vote on Assembly Floor
SB 524 Arreguín Senate Third Reading By Schultz
Assembly Appropriations Hearing
Assembly Committee
Assembly Appropriations Hearing
Do pass as amended
Assembly Privacy And Consumer Protection Hearing
Assembly Committee
Assembly Privacy And Consumer Protection Hearing
Do pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]
Assembly Public Safety Hearing
Assembly Committee
Assembly Public Safety Hearing
Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on [Privacy and Consumer Protection]
Vote on Senate Floor
Senate Floor
Vote on Senate Floor
Senate 3rd Reading SB524 Arreguín
Senate Appropriations Hearing
Senate Committee
Senate Appropriations Hearing
Do pass as amended
Senate Appropriations Hearing
Senate Committee
Senate Appropriations Hearing
Placed on suspense file
Senate Public Safety Hearing
Senate Committee
Senate Public Safety Hearing
Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]
Introduced
Senate Floor
Introduced
Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.

Contacts

Profile
Nick SchultzD
Assemblymember
Bill Author
Not Contacted
Not Contacted
Profile
Jesse ArreguinD
Senator
Bill Author
Not Contacted
Not Contacted
0 of 2 row(s) selected.
Page 1 of 1
Select All Legislators
Profile
Nick SchultzD
Assemblymember
Bill Author
Profile
Jesse ArreguinD
Senator
Bill Author

Get Involved

Act Now!

Email the authors or create an email template to send to all relevant legislators.

Introduced By

Jesse Arreguin
Jesse ArreguinD
California State Senator
Co-Author
Nick Schultz
Nick SchultzD
California State Assembly Member
70% progression
Bill has passed both houses in identical form and is being prepared for the Governor (9/10/2025)

Latest Voting History

September 10, 2025
PASS
Senate Floor
Vote on Senate Floor
AyesNoesNVRTotalResult
2810240PASS

Key Takeaways

  • Establishes a policy requiring per-page AI use disclosure and the officer's signature.
  • Requires retention of the first AI draft for as long as the final report is kept.
  • Mandates an audit trail showing who used AI and the input video or audio.
  • Restricts contracted vendors to use data only for LEA purposes or court orders.

Get Involved

Act Now!

Email the authors or create an email template to send to all relevant legislators.

Introduced By

Jesse Arreguin
Jesse ArreguinD
California State Senator
Co-Author
Nick Schultz
Nick SchultzD
California State Assembly Member

Summary

Senator Arreguín, with Assembly Member Schultz as a coauthor, advances a measure that would require law enforcement agencies to adopt a formal policy governing the use of artificial intelligence in official reports, mandating per-page disclosure of AI involvement and a responsible officer’s signature on the final document, while preserving the first AI draft and creating an auditable record of AI usage. The proposal applies to any agency employing peace officers across state and local government, and it is described as a state-mandated local program with a reimbursement pathway if costs are found to be mandated.

Core provisions require that every official report identify the specific AI tools used on each page and include the statement that the report was written with artificial intelligence, alongside the officer’s or agency member’s signature verifying the contents. If AI is used to prepare an official report, the first AI draft must be retained for as long as the official report is retained, and AI-generated drafts are not themselves sworn statements. An audit trail must log the identity of the user who operated the AI and, where available, the video and audio inputs used to generate the narrative. Contracted vendors may not share or use agency data beyond the agency’s purposes or court orders, but may access data for troubleshooting, bias mitigation, accuracy improvement, or system refinement. Definitions set boundaries for terms such as “artificial intelligence,” “first draft,” “official report,” “contracted vendor,” and “law enforcement agency.”

Implementation hinges on local agencies adopting policies that incorporate these elements, updating standard operating procedures and training, and establishing IT capabilities to capture disclosures, signatures, and audit trails; retention practices for first drafts must align with the duration of the official report’s retention. The measure contemplates potential costs to local agencies, with reimbursement governed by the state’s mandate framework if the Commission on State Mandates determines costs are mandated by the state, though there is no explicit funding within the bill. Enforcement provisions are not specified in the text, with oversight anticipated to occur through existing mandate reimbursement processes and internal compliance mechanisms.

Contextual considerations include how AI-disclosed, signed official reports and the accompanying audit trails may affect evidentiary authentication, discovery, and public-records practices, as well as the data governance implications for contracted vendors. Stakeholders include law enforcement agencies, district attorneys, courts, and technology providers, all of whom would navigate new policy requirements, retention obligations, and contract modifications. The bill does not specify an effective date or phase-in schedule, leaving implementation details to standard statutory practice. Overall, the measure codifies governance around AI-assisted report-writing and data handling in policing, emphasizing disclosure, traceability, and vendor controls.

70% progression
Bill has passed both houses in identical form and is being prepared for the Governor (9/10/2025)

Key Dates

Vote on Senate Floor
Senate Floor
Vote on Senate Floor
Unfinished Business SB524 Arreguín et al. Concurrence
Vote on Assembly Floor
Assembly Floor
Vote on Assembly Floor
SB 524 Arreguín Senate Third Reading By Schultz
Assembly Appropriations Hearing
Assembly Committee
Assembly Appropriations Hearing
Do pass as amended
Assembly Privacy And Consumer Protection Hearing
Assembly Committee
Assembly Privacy And Consumer Protection Hearing
Do pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]
Assembly Public Safety Hearing
Assembly Committee
Assembly Public Safety Hearing
Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on [Privacy and Consumer Protection]
Vote on Senate Floor
Senate Floor
Vote on Senate Floor
Senate 3rd Reading SB524 Arreguín
Senate Appropriations Hearing
Senate Committee
Senate Appropriations Hearing
Do pass as amended
Senate Appropriations Hearing
Senate Committee
Senate Appropriations Hearing
Placed on suspense file
Senate Public Safety Hearing
Senate Committee
Senate Public Safety Hearing
Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]
Introduced
Senate Floor
Introduced
Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.

Latest Voting History

September 10, 2025
PASS
Senate Floor
Vote on Senate Floor
AyesNoesNVRTotalResult
2810240PASS

Contacts

Profile
Nick SchultzD
Assemblymember
Bill Author
Not Contacted
Not Contacted
Profile
Jesse ArreguinD
Senator
Bill Author
Not Contacted
Not Contacted
0 of 2 row(s) selected.
Page 1 of 1
Select All Legislators
Profile
Nick SchultzD
Assemblymember
Bill Author
Profile
Jesse ArreguinD
Senator
Bill Author