California Assembly Bill AB1845

California 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/11/26
• Refer: 3/9/26
• Report Pass: 4/8/26
• Refer: 4/13/26
• Report Pass: 4/15/26
• Refer: 4/15/26
• Refer: 4/29/26
• Report Pass: 5/14/26
• Engrossed: 5/21/26
• Refer: 5/21/26
• Refer: 6/3/26

Caption

An act to amend Sections 67380, 67381, and 67383 of, to add Section 66281.85 to, and to repeal and add Section 67381.1 of, the Education Code, relating to postsecondary education.

Impact

If enacted, AB 1845 will impose significant new responsibilities on postsecondary institutions to compile records of human trafficking incidents alongside existing crime reports. This requirement will extend to all campuses, regardless of funding, and aims to ensure that institutions maintain adequate records and facilitate appropriate reporting to law enforcement. By incorporating human trafficking into the training and reporting requirements, this legislation seeks to establish a framework that actively counters such exploitation in educational settings, thereby enhancing the protection and safety of students.

Summary

Assembly Bill 1845, also known as the Student Safety and Anti-Exploitation Act, aims to enhance student safety in California's higher education systems by addressing the important issue of human trafficking. The bill mandates that postsecondary institutions, including community colleges, the California State University, and the University of California, implement new training programs for employees on recognizing and reporting incidents of human trafficking. This training is to be included as part of the existing sexual harassment training and will require annual completion. The intent of the bill is to equip staff with the knowledge necessary to identify signs of human trafficking and to facilitate appropriate responses to such incidents.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding AB 1845 appears to be largely supportive, particularly among advocates for student safety and anti-trafficking measures. Supporters emphasize the necessity of training staff to recognize and intervene in potential trafficking situations, viewing it as a proactive step towards safeguarding vulnerable populations on campus. However, some concerns may arise regarding the implementation of these requirements, especially regarding the adequacy of funding and resources necessary for compliance. There may be differing views among stakeholders on the potential bureaucratic implications and the impact on institutional operations.

Contention

One notable point of contention could revolve around the balance between the imposition of state-mandated responsibilities and the capacities of educational institutions to fulfill these duties effectively. Particularly, there may be discussions about funding and resources necessary for the required training and reporting systems, with advocates urging for state support to ease this burden. Furthermore, the consequences of non-compliance and the reporting structures established could also generate debate among stakeholders, particularly regarding how these changes affect campus law enforcement relationships.