An act to amend Section 135 of the Code of Civil Procedure, to amend Sections 37220.7, 45203, 79020, and 88203 of the Education Code, and to amend Sections 6700, 19853, and 19853.1 of the Government Code, relating to Diwali.
AB 268 adds Diwali to California’s statutory holiday framework and makes conforming changes across the Government Code, Code of Civil Procedure, and Education Code. The bill recognizes the 15th day of Kartik in the Hindu lunar calendar as Diwali and places it alongside other state holidays such as Lunar New Year, Cesar Chavez Day, Genocide Remembrance Day, Juneteenth, and Native American Day. It also clarifies that Diwali is not a judicial holiday, meaning courts do not automatically close for it, even though it is a state holiday.
The bill gives public employers and educational institutions several ways to observe Diwali. State employees may elect to use holiday credit or, in some cases, paid time off in recognition of Diwali; community colleges and public schools may close on Diwali if allowed by a memorandum of understanding with represented employees; and public schools and educational institutions may hold exercises acknowledging and celebrating Diwali’s meaning and importance. The bill also updates holiday provisions for classified school employees and community college employees so Diwali can be treated as an optional paid holiday under negotiated agreements.
AB 268 amends multiple statutes to insert Diwali into the list of state holidays in Government Code section 6700 and to extend related holiday options in state employee leave provisions. It also revises Education Code sections governing public schools, community colleges, and classified employees, and amends Code of Civil Procedure section 135 to exclude Diwali from judicial holidays. In practical terms, the bill affects state agencies, school districts, community college districts, courts, and employees covered by collective bargaining agreements, while leaving implementation in many settings dependent on local or negotiated decisions.
The overall sentiment around the bill appears strongly positive and noncontroversial. The voting record shows unanimous support at every recorded stage, with no recorded no votes in committee or on the floor. The bill’s findings emphasize the cultural and religious significance of Diwali to Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Indian American, and South Asian American communities, suggesting the measure was framed as a recognition and inclusion bill rather than a contested policy change.
There is little evidence of substantive opposition in the available materials, and no committee transcript excerpts identify major disputes. The main structural point of contention, to the extent one exists, is not whether Diwali should be recognized, but how broadly and in what form: as a state holiday, an optional closure day for schools and colleges, a paid leave option for employees, and a nonjudicial holiday for courts. The bill resolves that by making many of those effects permissive or dependent on bargaining agreements rather than mandating universal closures.
AB 268 expands California’s statutory holiday list to include Diwali and makes conforming amendments to state employee leave rules, school and community college holiday provisions, and judicial holiday law. It affects Government Code sections governing state holidays and state employee holiday credit, Education Code sections governing public school and community college closures and employee pay, and Code of Civil Procedure section 135 governing judicial holidays. The bill generally authorizes, rather than requires, many public employers to observe Diwali, often subject to memoranda of understanding or local governing board action, while expressly excluding Diwali from judicial holiday status.
The bill’s reception was overwhelmingly favorable. Every recorded committee and floor vote was unanimous, and the bill ultimately became Chapter 358 of the Statutes of 2025. The legislative findings present Diwali as an important religious and cultural observance for multiple faith communities and emphasize themes of renewal, light, and community, which likely contributed to the broad support. No committee transcript material was provided showing organized opposition or significant debate.
No major controversy is evident in the available record. The main policy questions were administrative: whether Diwali should be added as a state holiday, whether schools and community colleges should be allowed to close for it, and whether state and classified employees should be able to use paid leave or holiday credit for it. The bill addresses those questions by making many of the benefits optional or contingent on collective bargaining agreements, which likely reduced opposition. The only notable limitation is that Diwali is recognized as a state holiday but not as a judicial holiday, preserving court operations unless separately addressed.