An act to add Section 3040.5 to the Family Code, relating to child custody.
Summary
AB 1375 adds Section 3040.5 to the Family Code to require courts, when determining a child’s best interests in custody proceedings, to consider any relevant and admissible evidence that a parent has caused human trafficking of the child or the other parent. The bill does not create a new custody presumption or a separate trafficking finding standard; instead, it directs courts to treat trafficking-related evidence as a factor in the existing best-interests analysis under Family Code Section 3011.
In practical terms, the measure expands the set of circumstances a family court may weigh when deciding custody and visitation. It aligns trafficking-related conduct with other serious parental misconduct already relevant in custody cases, such as domestic violence, and is intended to ensure that trafficking allegations supported by admissible evidence are not overlooked in custody determinations.
Impact
The bill amends California family law by adding a new statutory factor for courts to consider in child custody cases involving human trafficking. It affects Family Code Section 3040.5 and operates within the broader best-interests framework of Section 3011, potentially influencing custody and visitation outcomes where a parent is shown to have trafficked a child or the other parent. The bill does not appropriate funds, create a local program, or impose a fiscal committee burden, and it primarily affects family courts, parents in contested custody matters, and children exposed to trafficking-related abuse.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have received strongly favorable and largely noncontroversial support throughout the legislative process. All recorded committee and floor votes were unanimous or near-unanimous, including 11-0 committee votes, a 79-0 Assembly third reading vote, a 37-0 consent calendar vote, and a 72-0 Senate concurrence vote. The absence of recorded opposition in the available materials suggests broad agreement with the bill’s purpose of protecting children and victims in custody proceedings.
Contention
No significant opposition or debate is reflected in the available committee transcripts, which were not provided, and the voting record shows no recorded dissent. Any potential point of contention would likely center on how courts interpret and weigh “relevant, admissible evidence” of human trafficking in custody disputes, including evidentiary standards and the risk of contested allegations affecting family law proceedings. However, the legislative record provided does not show organized disagreement over the bill’s policy direction.