SACRAMENTO — Governor Gavin Newsom signed Assembly Bill 46 into law on Monday, June 29, 2026, significantly broadening the authority of California judges to deny mental health diversion to defendants who pose a risk to public safety.
The new legislation, authored by Assemblymember Stephanie Nguyen of Elk Grove, effectively eliminates strict legal benchmarks that previously limited the discretion of local courts. This legislative overhaul marks a significant victory for law enforcement groups and prosecutors across the state, who spent three years advocating to close what they described as a dangerous loophole within California's criminal justice system.
Mental health diversion, established under California Penal Code section 1001.36, was originally created to offer treatment pathways for individuals whose diagnosed mental illness directly contributed to their offenses. However, recent state court rulings had narrowed how judges could evaluate these requests. According to sponsoring agencies, including the Sacramento County District Attorney’s Office, and co-sponsors such as the Orange County District Attorney’s Office, these rulings often compelled judges to approve diversion requests, even when treatment options were minimal or inadequate, or when defendants had a history of failed rehabilitation.
AB 46 officially reinstates full judicial authority to assess whether a defendant presents an undue risk to community safety and whether a proposed treatment plan is clinically sound and effective. The bill also reinforces the constitutional rights of victims, as protected under Marsy’s Law, during court proceedings. Orange County District Attorney Todd Spitzer lauded the Governor's signature, emphasizing that the bill ensures mental illness is not used to escape accountability for dangerous criminal behavior.
While the bill garnered bipartisan legislative support, it faced considerable pushback from a segment of Democratic lawmakers and a broad coalition of criminal justice reform advocates. Opponents argue that AB 46 unravels critical progressive reforms aimed at addressing mental health issues within the justice system.
Organizations like the California Public Defenders Association (CPDA), alongside various civil rights groups, were primary critics of the measure. They contend that restricting diversion pathways will inevitably lead vulnerable individuals back into a revolving door of incarceration. Critics also maintain that the previous standards appropriately prioritized healthcare intervention over imprisonment, and that expanding a judge’s power to reject diversion relies on an overestimation of public danger rather than on proven outcomes of treatment.
The new law represents a significant shift in how mental health cases are handled within California's criminal justice system, balancing treatment needs with public safety concerns as defined by its proponents.
