The watchtower for Faith, Family, and Freedom Legislation

California AB1134: Coerced marriage.

☆ Watch
  1. Introduced
  2. Passed Assembly
  3. Passed Senate
  4. To Governor
  5. Became Law

Overview

This bill amends California law regarding forced or coerced marriage, addressing legal protections against marriages entered into under duress or coercion.

Law Today

California law currently makes it a crime to compel a woman to marry by force, menace, or duress, and allows a person whose consent to marriage was obtained by force to petition for nullity within 4 years after the marriage. The law also criminalized compelling a person to be defiled.

If Passed

The bill removes the crime of compelling someone to be defiled, clarifies that forced-marriage laws apply equally regardless of victim age, and most importantly, allows courts (starting January 1, 2027) to permit petitions for nullity of marriage based on forced marriage even after the 4-year deadline if the person can show good cause. This gives victims of forced marriage a longer window—potentially much longer—to escape the marriage legally, which may be especially important for young people coerced into marriage by family members.

AI-generated from the bill text — verify against the official text.

Should I support this?

  1. Strongly Oppose
  2. Likely Oppose
  3. Neutral
  4. This billLikely Support
  5. Strongly Support

Likely Support

The bill protects individuals—including young people and adults—from being trapped in marriages imposed by coercion or force, and extends their legal remedies to escape such marriages. For Christian parents who value parental authority, the bill distinguishes between legitimate parental guidance and coercion; it does not restrict parents' rights to advise their children about marriage, but rather protects children from being forced into unwanted unions, which aligns with Christian teachings on free will and human dignity in marriage.

AI assessment using F3’s editorial criteria — faith, family, and freedom. This is F3’s policy judgment; verify the provisions in the official bill text.

Likely supporters & opponents

Likely support

  • anti-human trafficking organizations and domestic violence advocates — Extending the time limit to challenge forced marriages helps victims, especially those who were too young, isolated, or controlled to act within four years.
  • religious liberty and parental-rights groups concerned about forced marriage — The bill protects individuals from being trapped in marriages against their will, a concern that crosses religious and cultural lines.

Likely opposition

  • some family-law practitioners or groups skeptical of extending statutes of limitations — Removing the time limit for forced-marriage nullity could complicate estate, property, and custody settlements long after a marriage occurred.

AI-inferred typical positions based on the bill’s substance — general stakeholder categories, not confirmed endorsements.

💬 Chat about this bill ↗Official bill text ↗View on LegiScan ↗

Official summary

An act to amend, repeal, and add Section 2211 of the Family Code, and to amend Section 265 of the Penal Code, relating to marriage.

Sponsors

  • Jasmeet Bains (D)
  • Ash Kalra (D)

Status timeline

  1. 2025-10-11Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 633, Statutes of 2025.
  2. 2025-10-11Approved by the Governor.
  3. 2025-09-11Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 4 p.m.
  4. 2025-09-04In Assembly. Ordered to Engrossing and Enrolling.A
  5. 2025-09-04Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 39. Noes 0. Page 2523.).S
  6. 2025-09-02Ordered to special consent calendar.S
  7. 2025-08-29Read second time. Ordered to third reading.S
  8. 2025-08-29From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (August 29).S
  9. 2025-08-18In committee: Referred to suspense file.S
  10. 2025-07-08From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 6. Noes 0.) (July 8). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.S
  11. 2025-06-25From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on PUB. S. with recommendation: To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 12. Noes 0.) (June 24). Re-referred to Com. on PUB. S.S
  12. 2025-06-11Referred to Coms. on JUD. and PUB. S.S
  13. 2025-06-03In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.S
  14. 2025-06-02Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 79. Noes 0. Page 1879.)A
  15. 2025-05-27Read second time. Ordered to third reading.A
  16. 2025-05-23From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 14. Noes 0.) (May 23).A
  17. 2025-05-07In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.A
  18. 2025-04-28Re-referred to Com. on APPR. pursuant to Joint Rule 10.5.A
  19. 2025-04-24Read second time. Ordered to third reading.A
  20. 2025-04-23Read second time and amended. Ordered returned to second reading.A
  21. 2025-04-22From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 12. Noes 0.) (April 22).A
  22. 2025-04-09From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on JUD. (Ayes 8. Noes 0.) (April 8). Re-referred to Com. on JUD.A
  23. 2025-04-02Re-referred to Com. on PUB. S.A
  24. 2025-04-01From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on PUB. S. Read second time and amended.A
  25. 2025-03-11Re-referred to Com. on PUB. S.A
  26. 2025-03-10From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on PUB. S. Read second time and amended.A
  27. 2025-03-10Referred to Com. on PUB. S.A
  28. 2025-02-21From printer. May be heard in committee March 23.A
  29. 2025-02-20Read first time. To print.A

H = House · S = Senate · A = Assembly