California Assembly Bill AB1928

California 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/13/26
• Refer: 3/2/26
• Report Pass: 4/8/26
• Refer: 4/13/26
• Report Pass: 4/22/26
• Refer: 4/22/26
• Report Pass: 5/6/26
• Engrossed: 5/14/26
• Refer: 5/14/26
• Refer: 5/27/26
• Report Pass: 6/10/26
• Refer: 6/10/26

Caption

An act to amend Section 66281.8 of of, and to add Section 66281.10 to, the Education Code, relating to postsecondary education.

Impact

The bill imposes specific procedural requirements on California's postsecondary institutions, which include the University of California and California State University systems, as well as community colleges and private institutions receiving state financial assistance. Educational institutions will be responsible for ensuring that students can access support throughout the complaint process. This includes allowing advisory support during reporting, investigation, and informal resolution stages. Notably, institutions might incur additional costs related to staff training and determining if the mandates create any financial burdens, which may provoke a conversation regarding compliance with state reimbursement processes mandated by law.

Summary

Assembly Bill 1928, introduced by Assembly Member Fong, seeks to enhance procedures for handling sexual harassment complaints within postsecondary educational institutions by amending existing provisions in the Education Code. The bill mandates that each party involved in a sexual harassment complaint—the complainant and the respondent—must have both a support person and an advisor present during all stages of the grievance process. This change aims to provide further emotional and procedural support, thereby reinforcing students' rights under federal Title IX regulations. By imposing these requirements, the bill addresses concerns about fairness and equity in the resolution of harassment cases in educational settings.

Sentiment

The sentiment around AB 1928 appears to be positively inclined towards providing robust support for students facing sexual harassment. Advocates for the bill suggest it reinforces students’ rights and ensures a fairer hearing process, which can significantly impact the emotional well-being of the parties involved. Critics may raise concerns about affordability and the administrative burden placed on educational institutions, especially regarding how these requirements might strain resources or divert focus from other educational priorities.

Contention

One point of contention involves the potential increase in administrative duties for educational institutions, particularly community colleges, which may worry about the feasibility of implementing these additional support structures. Opponents could argue that while the intentions are noble, the financial implications, staffing needs, and training requirements may cause practical challenges. Furthermore, there is a discourse about finding a balance between adequately supporting victims of harassment and ensuring that institutions do not become overwhelmed by compliance costs, which can ultimately affect the educational environment as a whole.