Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) - AB 1887
In enacting AB 1887, the California Legislature issued the following findings: (a) California is a leader in protecting civil rights and preventing discrimination; (b) California's robust nondiscrimination laws include protections on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression, among other characteristics; (c) religious freedom is a cornerstone of law and public policy in the United States, and the Legislature strongly supports and affirms this important freedom; (d) the exercise of religious freedom should not be a justification for discrimination; (e) California must take action to avoid supporting or financing discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people; and (f) it is the policy of the State of California to promote fairness and equality and to combat discrimination. (Gov. Code, § 11139.8, subd. (a).)
January 1, 2017
Yes. The California Legislature created exceptions in AB 1887 that allow travel to states in certain circumstances. (Gov. Code, § 11139.8, subd. (c).) These exceptions only apply if travel to a subject state is "required." (Ibid.)
Specifically, AB 1887 does not apply to state travel that is required for any of the following purposes:
- Enforcement of California law, including auditing and revenue collection.
- To meet contractual obligations incurred before January 1, 2017.
- To comply with requests by the federal government to appear before committees.
- To participate in meetings or training required by a grant or required to maintain grant funding.
- To complete job-required training necessary to maintain licensure or similar standards required for holding a position, in the event that comparable training cannot be obtained in California or a different state not subject to the travel prohibition.
- For the protection of public health, welfare, or safety, as determined by the affected agency, department, board, authority, or commission, or by the affected legislative office.
(Gov. Code, § 11139.8, subd. (c).)
The prohibition on state-funded travel shall continue while any such law that discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression remains in effect. (Gov. Code, § 11139.8, subd. (d).)
A state is subject to the travel prohibition if, after June 26, 2015, it has enacted a law that voids or repeals, or has the effect of voiding or repealing, existing state or local protections against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression, or has enacted a law that authorizes or requires discrimination against same-sex couples or their families or on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression, including any law that creates an exemption to antidiscrimination laws in order to permit discrimination against same-sex couples or their families or on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression.
(Gov. Code, § 11139.8, subd. (b).)
No. Travel to a state is prohibited only as long as that state remains on the current prohibition list.
The travel prohibition does not apply to travel that is required to meet contractual obligations incurred before January 1, 2017. The California Department of Human Resources has advised that travel approved prior to January 1, 2017 to a state on the prohibition list must be resubmitted to Department Directors and Agency Secretaries (or their designees) before seeking final approval from the Governor's Office through the out-of-state travel process for individual trips.
- Alabama: H.B. 24, enacted in May 2017. (Ala. Code § 38-7C-1 et seq. (2017).)
- Idaho: House Bill 500 and House Bill 509, both enacted on March 30, 2020
- Iowa: House File Bill No. 766, enacted on May 3, 2019
- Kansas: S.B. 175, enacted in March 2016. (Kan. Stat. Ann. §§ 60-5311-5313 (2016).)
- Kentucky: S.B. 17, enacted in March 2017. (Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§ 158.183, 158.188, 158.186, 164.348 (2017).)
- Mississippi: H.B. 1523, enacted in July 2016. (Miss. Code Ann. § 11-62-1 et seq. (2016).)
- North Carolina: H.B. 2, enacted in March 2016. (N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 115C-47(63); 115C–521.2; 143–422.10 et seq.; 143-760 (2016).)
- Oklahoma: S.B. 1140, enacted in May 2018. (Okla. Stat. § 1-8-112 of Title 10A (2018).)
- South Carolina: H-4950 Paragraph 38.29, enacted in July 5, 2018.
- South Dakota: S.B. 149, enacted in March 2017.
- Tennessee: S.B. 1556, enacted in March 2016. (Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 63-22-301; 63-22-302; 63–22–110(b)(3) (2016).)
- Texas: H.B. 3859, enacted in June 2017. (Texas Hum. Res. Code Ann. § 45.001 et seq. (2017).)
No. AB 1887 prohibits the state from requiring employees to travel to a state subject to AB 1887's travel prohibition. In addition, the law prohibits California from approving a request for state-funded or state-sponsored travel to such a state. (Gov. Code, § 11139.8, subd. (b).) Therefore, the law does not apply to any personal travel of a state employee or private individuals.