Inmates: visitation., the official text

An act to add Sections 6402.5 and 6403 to the Penal Code, relating to corrections.

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST

Existing law requires the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, when amending or adopting regulations that may impact the visitation of inmates, to recognize and consider the value of visiting as a means to improve prison safety, the important role of inmate visitation in maintaining connection with family and community, and the role of inmate visitation in preparing for successful release.
This bill would require each facility, as defined, to be open for visitation at least 3 days per week. The bill would prohibit a facility from denying visitation on the basis of specified characteristics or factors, including, among others, sex, race, and criminal history. The bill would require a facility to allow all visits with an incarcerated person to be contact visits unless the incarcerated person is housed in a restricted housing unit, as specified. The bill would prohibit a facility from denying, revoking, suspending, limiting, or interfering with visitation privileges for a disciplinary matter or rule violation unrelated to visitation. The bill would require facility staff to take specified actions with regard to correctable issues with a visitation, including, among other things, allowing the visitor a reasonable opportunity to correct the issue and return to visiting up to one hour before the end of the visiting period. The bill would prohibit denial of visitation if a visitor has traveled more than 100 miles to attend a visit, or has not visited within 30 days, unless there has been a finding of a credible and documented security threat.
The bill would prohibit a facility from searching visitors without their voluntary, informed, and written consent. The bill would authorize a facility to respond to refusal of that search only with denial of contact visiting for that day, and would require the facility to offer a noncontact visit on the same day, if space is available. The bill would require other restrictions and procedures for searches of visitors, as specified.

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

SECTION 1.
This act shall be known, and may be cited, as the Visitor Protections and Safety Act.

SEC. 2.
The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a) Women, particularly Black women, are the primary visitors of incarcerated people. National research shows that one in 4 women and one in 2 Black women have a family member in prison.
(b) Essie Justice Group’s “Because She’s Powerful: The Political Isolation and Resistance of Women with Incarcerated Loved Ones,” also underscored that the burden of maintaining family connections under these conditions falls overwhelmingly on women, who already face disproportionate economic, emotional, and caregiving responsibilities when their loved ones are incarcerated.
(c) Moreover, the report found that 70% of women are the primary support for at least one of their incarcerated loved ones; 55% of women see their loved ones only monthly or a few times a year, and over one-quarter never see their incarcerated loved one; and more than 80% of women listed at least one person, incarcerated or not, who depends on them for a basic need.
(d) California’s visitation rules are not set in statute and vary widely by facility. Title 15 regulations provide little procedural guidance and almost no enforceable rights for visitors. As a result, visitors routinely experience arbitrary denials, last-minute cancellations after traveling long distances, humiliating searches, harassment by staff, and the absence of any meaningful appeals process.
(e) These harms are routinely justified under a broad and unchecked invocation of “safety.” In practice, this has created an environment where facility staff wield extraordinary discretion with no guardrails, no transparency, and no accountability.
(f) Women visitors report being subjected to sexual harassment, degrading searches, intimidation, and retaliation for asserting basic dignity. Children are turned away without explanation. Families lose visits after driving hundreds of miles, often at great financial and emotional cost.
(g) Visitation is not a luxury. It is a public safety, dignity, gender justice, and family connection issue.
(h) The Legislature has repeatedly acknowledged the importance of in-person visitation but has not yet created a comprehensive statutory framework that protects visitors themselves. This act is designed to fill that gap.

SEC. 3.
Section 6402.5 is added to the Penal Code, to read:
6402.5.
(a) For the purposes of this section, the following definitions apply:
(1) “Credible security threat” means a specific, articulable, and documented facts that establish a reasonable belief that a visitor or incarcerated person presents an immediate and identifiable risk of introducing contraband, facilitating escape, or causing physical harm within the facility. A credible security threat shall be based on objective information, including reliable intelligence, direct observation, or verified evidence, and shall not be based solely on generalized safety concerns, institutional convenience, anonymous or uncorroborated allegations, personal characteristics, protected traits, prior criminal history unrelated to institutional safety, refusal to consent to a voluntary search, or the mere existence of a past rule violation.
(2) “Facility” means any institution operated by the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation for the purposes of detention.
(3) “Visit” and “visitation” means an in-person visit conducted at a facility during established visiting hours.
(b) Each facility shall be open for visitation at least three days per week.
(c) A facility shall not deny, revoke, limit, or interfere with visitation based on any of the following characteristics, whether actual or perceived, of a person in custody or a prospective visitor:
(1) Sex.
(2) Sexual orientation.
(3) Race.
(4) Age.
(5) Nationality.
(6) Political beliefs.
(7) Religious beliefs and expression.
(8) Criminal record.
(9) Pending criminal or civil case.
(10) Lack of family relationship.
(11) Gender, including gender identity, self-image, appearance, behavior or expression.
(12) Disability.
(13) Hair color, texture, or protective hairstyles, including, but not limited to, tightly coiled, curly, wavy, or Afro-textured hair, braids, locs, twists, Bantu knots, cornrows, Afros, and other natural hair styling methods.
(14) Body type, body size, weight, height, or other physical characteristics.
(d) (1) A facility shall allow all visits with an incarcerated person to be contact visits unless the incarcerated person is housed in a restricted housing unit.
(2) A facility may limit an incarcerated person housed in a restricted housing unit to noncontact visits only for the duration of that placement.
(3) A facility shall restore contact visiting immediately upon the incarcerated person’s return to a nonrestricted housing unit.
(e) A facility shall not deny, revoke, suspend, limit, or interfere with visiting privileges for a disciplinary matter or rule violation unrelated to visitation.
(f) A facility shall review any limitation, denial, or suspension of visitation imposed prior to January 1, 2027, at the incarcerated person’s next annual classification review and modify it as necessary to conform to this section.
(g) A facility shall not deny visitors entry based on correctable issues, including, but not limited to, dress code violations, excess number of accompanying minors, or missing documentation. For correctable issues, staff shall do all of the following:
(1) Provide clear and specific guidance on how to remedy the issue in writing.
(2) Allow the visitor a reasonable opportunity to correct the issue and return to visiting up to one hour before the end of the visiting period.
(3) Permit the visit to proceed once the issue is resolved.
(4) Offer reasonable alternatives, including a noncontact visit, if space is available, when correction is not possible that day.
(h) If a visit is denied on the day of visiting for a noncorrectable issue, the facility shall provide written documentation to the visitor on the same day stating:
(1) The specific reason for denial.
(2) The length of the denial and explaining how to appeal.
(3) Information regarding the right to appeal and how to appeal.
(i) A visit may not be denied if a person has traveled more than 100 miles to attend a visit or has not visited within 30 days, unless there has been a finding of a credible and documented security threat. The facility may not deny a visit under this subdivision for correctable issues described in subdivision (g).

SEC. 4.
Section 6403 is added to the Penal Code, to read:
6403.
(a) For the purposes of this section, the following definitions apply:
(1) “Assistive device” means mobility aids designed to assist mobility and safety for individuals with disabilities, including, but not limited to, manual and electric wheelchairs, walkers, rollators, mobility scooters, canes, and crutches.
(2) “Credible security threat” means a specific, articulable, and documented facts that establish a reasonable belief that a visitor or incarcerated person presents an immediate and identifiable risk of introducing contraband, facilitating escape, or causing physical harm within the facility. A credible security threat shall be based on objective information, including reliable intelligence, direct observation, or verified evidence, and shall not be based solely on generalized safety concerns, institutional convenience, anonymous or uncorroborated allegations, personal characteristics, protected traits, prior criminal history unrelated to institutional safety, refusal to consent to a voluntary search, or the mere existence of a past rule violation.
(3) “Facility” means any institution operated by the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation for the purposes of detention.
(4) “Routine screening” means a standardized, minimally intrusive inspection process applied uniformly to all visitors as a condition of entry, for the limited purpose of detecting weapons or contraband. Routine screening shall consist only of passage through a walk-through metal detector or hand-held metal detection wand, visual inspection of personal property, or screening by electronic detection equipment applied in the same manner to all visitors.
(5) “Strip search,” “visual body cavity search,” and “physical body cavity search” have the same meaning as defined in Section 4030.
(6) “Visit” and “visitation” means an in-person visit conducted at a facility during established visiting hours.
(b) (1) A facility may subject any person coming onto the property to routine screening or a voluntary search to ensure facility security and prevent the introduction or removal of contraband.
(2) A facility shall not search visitors without their voluntary, informed, and written consent unless facility officials possess a court-issued warrant or the individual is lawfully detained pursuant to other law.
(3) A facility shall give visitors information regarding their right to refuse a voluntary search that is translated into the top five most commonly spoken languages in California according to the most recently completed census before providing their written consent to the search.
(4) A facility shall not forcibly search any visitor who does not consent to a search. If a person refuses a voluntary search pursuant to this subdivision, the facility may only deny contact visiting for that day. The facility shall offer a noncontact visit on the same day, if space is available, unless there is an immediate and credible security threat.
(5) A facility shall not punish refusal to consent to a search with suspension, termination, or future restriction of visitation privileges, nor shall the refusal to consent to a search be recorded as misconduct in any permanent record.
(6) For any visitor who is denied visitation or has visitation restricted due to failing a search or refusing to consent to a search shall, at the time of that denial, the facility shall issue a written notice detailing what occurred, the date, time, who was present, and the underlying rationale given to the visitor for the denial or restriction.
(c) (1) A facility shall conduct all searches in the least intrusive manner reasonably available and shall limit searches to what is strictly necessary to address the specific security concern.
(2) Clothed body searches conducted by the facility shall consist of a visual inspection and use of a hand-held wand, and the facility shall prohibit physical contact by staff.
(3) A facility shall conduct unclothed body searches only after providing notice that the search is voluntary, obtaining the visitor’s written consent, and with reasonable suspicion that contraband is concealed on the body and no less intrusive means are available. The facility shall require written supervisory approval for unclothed searches documenting the specific facts supporting reasonable suspicion. They shall be conducted in a private setting by staff of the same gender as the visitor, with no physical contact.
(4) The facility shall not conduct strip searches, body cavity searches, and any search involving physical intrusion without a court-issued warrant for the search.
(5) (A) Except as specified in subparagraph (B), the department shall not conduct strip searches, visual body cavity searches, and physical body cavity searches of visitors who are under 18 years of age.
(B) If the department has probable cause and obtains a warrant to search, the department may conduct strip searches of visitors who are under 18 years of age. If there is probable cause that the visitor is attempting to introduce contraband, unauthorized substances, or other unauthorized items into the institution, the department shall notify the visitor and their parent or guardian in writing, and the department shall receive written consent from the visitor and their parent or guardian prior to conducting the search. If probable cause exists but the visitor and their parent or guardian do not consent to the visitor being searched, the department may offer a noncontact visit, if space is available, or deny the visit.
(d) (1) If a visitor is subjected to a search exceeding the standard screening applied to all visitors, the facility shall provide written notice on the same day stating the specific reason for the search and the name and title of the approving official.
(2) The facility shall log all searches beyond routine screening in a manner accessible for review through the visitation appeals process.
(3) The facility shall make all written notices and documentation related to searches of visitors available in the five most common languages spoken in California according to the most recent census.
(e) (1) The facility shall permit all visitors who cannot clear a metal detector due to a medically implanted or prosthetic device to present written verification from a licensed health care provider describing the device and its location.
(2) The facility shall not require renewal of that verification for permanent devices unless there is a material change in the device.
(3) The facility shall not require visitors who use wheelchairs or assistive devices to transfer to a facility wheelchair. The facility shall permit visitors to remain in their own wheelchair while the device is inspected using the least intrusive means available.
(4) The facility shall not punish failure to present documentation under this subdivision with permanent suspension of visitation, but the facility may require alternative screening measures or a noncontact visit for that day, if space is available.
(f) (1) The facility shall require that all searches be conducted professionally, respectfully, and without harassment, intimidation, or retaliatory intent.
(2) The facility shall prohibit retaliatory searches, searches based on personal characteristics unrelated to safety, and degrading or sexualized comments.
(3) The facility shall inform visitors of their right to file a complaint and shall prohibit retaliation for filing complaints.