A divided Supreme Court vacated the Ninth Circuit's stay in a per curiam ruling, allowing a district court injunction against California's student gender identity policies to take effect. The Court found religious parents are likely to succeed on Free Exercise and Due Process grounds — the week's decisive signal in California's ongoing constitutional battles with Washington.
SCOTUSblog — Mirabelli v. Bonta full case fileThe Ninth Circuit lifted most of a district court injunction that had blocked California's Age-Appropriate Design Code Act since 2023 — a significant win for the state's tech regulation agenda, though two key provisions remain enjoined as too vague.
California AG Rob Bonta called the ruling a "critical win," while NetChoice argued the Court's decision still limits the most harmful platform practices. The case now returns to the district court for proceedings consistent with the 9th Circuit's narrowed scope.
The Recorder — 9th Circuit AADC ruling, March 12, 2026After the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Trump's global tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act in February, Trump immediately imposed 15% tariffs under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 — a provision never previously invoked. California and 23 other states filed a second lawsuit in the Court of International Trade, with a motion for preliminary injunction filed March 13. Attorney General Bonta noted the state's 60th legal challenge to Trump policies since January 2025.
The states argue Section 122 is inapplicable: it requires a "large and serious" balance-of-payments deficit, not a trade deficit — and current economic conditions don't meet the threshold. A Yale Lab report estimated the tariffs cost the average California family roughly $1,000 annually.
The Trump administration's Department of Education issued a directive requiring colleges and universities to submit detailed admissions data disaggregated by race, test scores, and GPA by March 18 — to be used in federal civil rights enforcement. Attorney General Bonta, leading a coalition of 16 Democratic states filing suit on March 11–12, called the demand a "fishing expedition" that turns a statistical reporting tool into a "partisan bludgeon."
ACA 7 does not repeal California's 1996 Proposition 209, which banned affirmative action. Instead, it narrows the prohibition: limiting it to higher education admissions and enrollment while carving out room for state-funded programs proven to address documented disparities in health outcomes, educational attainment, and economic opportunity across communities defined by race, ethnicity, national origin, or marginalized genders. The Governor could authorize waivers for qualifying public agency programs meeting the evidence-based standard.
Sacramento Observer — ACA 7 Assembly passageAttorney General Bonta settled with The Walt Disney Company over California Consumer Privacy Act violations discovered in a 2024 sweep of streaming services. Disney's opt-out controls failed at every level: per-device, per-service, and per-platform — leaving most consumers' personal information still flowing to advertising partners even after they clicked "Do Not Sell."
Under the settlement, Disney must implement unified opt-out mechanisms across all connected services and devices. The settlement is subject to court approval.
Proposition 36, approved by nearly 70% of California voters in November 2024, faces a widening gap between voter mandate and funding reality. Governor Newsom's 2026-27 budget proposal includes zero new dollars for implementation.
Of roughly 9,000 people charged with treatment-mandated felonies in the first six months following Prop 36's December 2024 effective date, only 1,290 — 15% — chose the treatment pathway. Just 25 completed it. Counties are absorbing millions in unbudgeted costs for treatment capacity, court administration, and incarceration while the state has provided only a one-time $100 million spread over three years. Chief Probation Officers of California and law enforcement groups warn the measure will fail unless Sacramento acts in the current budget cycle.
CapRadio — Prop 36's state funding shortfallInsurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara and Assemblymember Lisa Calderon introduced the Make It FAIR Act after a December 2025 Department of Insurance examination found the California FAIR Plan had failed to comply with 17 critical recommendations on financial condition, corporate governance, and consumer protections. The FAIR Plan — California's insurer of last resort, created in 1986 — has grown to more than 600,000 active policies as private insurers have retreated from wildfire-exposed regions.
The Los Angeles City Council approved $177 million in contracts for eviction defense, rental assistance, and tenant education — funded primarily through Measure ULA, the 2022 "mansion tax" on high-value property transfers. Contracts run through March 31, 2029, serving an estimated 135,000 vulnerable tenants annually through the Stay Housed L.A. program.
The California Assembly passed AB 1656 without a single dissenting vote, extending to human trafficking cases the same scheduling flexibility already available in murder and domestic violence trials. Defendants in human trafficking prosecutions would gain "good cause" grounds for trial continuances, allowing counsel and courts adequate time to handle complex evidentiary issues, victim cooperation challenges, and multi-defendant logistics. The bill now advances to the Senate.
The Center Square — AB 1656 passageThe California Supreme Court heard argument in M. (J.) v. Illuminate Education, Inc. (S286699), a case with sweeping implications for education technology liability. The central question: whether a company that handles student records — but is not itself a medical provider — can be held liable under the Confidentiality of Medical Information Act for a data breach exposing sensitive student health and educational data. The Court's answer will shape how California courts analyze privacy liability across the ed-tech sector.
California Supreme Court — March 2026 oral argument calendarA California jury returned a $75 million intellectual property infringement verdict against a content aggregation company accused of systematically acquiring others' copyrighted materials, obscuring their origin, and reselling access to students and professionals. The scale of the verdict signals courts' willingness to impose significant damages in cases involving organized, platform-scale infringement — a signal with direct implications for AI training data disputes now proliferating in California federal courts.
The Recorder — $75M IP infringement verdict