California Civil Rights Act

California Civil Rights Act. The California Civil Rights Act is a foundational state statute that prohibits discrimination in business establishments and housing. Enacted in 1959, it significantly expanded upon federal protections and served as a model for subsequent, more comprehensive state laws. The act is a cornerstone of California's legal framework for ensuring equal access and opportunity, addressing gaps in mid-20th century federal civil rights legislation.

Background and legislative history

The push for state-level civil rights legislation gained momentum in the post-World War II era, influenced by the national Civil Rights Movement and specific incidents of discrimination within California. Prior state laws, like the 1897 Civic Center Act, were limited in scope. The California State Legislature, under the leadership of legislators such as Byron Rumford and Jesse M. Unruh, sought to create more robust protections. The act was signed into law in 1959 by Governor Edmund G. "Pat" Brown, a Democrat who championed progressive social legislation. Its passage preceded major federal laws like the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Fair Housing Act, establishing California as a leader in anti-discrimination policy. The act was later amended and bolstered by landmark statutes including the Unruh Civil Rights Act and the Rumford Fair Housing Act.

Key provisions and protected categories

The act initially focused on prohibiting discrimination in "all business establishments of every kind whatsoever," a broad definition that included hotels, restaurants, and theaters. It explicitly barred denial of services based on "race, color, religion, ancestry, or national origin." This language was groundbreaking for its time and provided a template for later expansions. Subsequent amendments, often prompted by rulings from the California Supreme Court and advocacy by groups like the American Civil Liberties Union, added more protected categories. These now include sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital status, disability, medical condition, and age, making it one of the nation's most comprehensive state civil rights laws.

Comparison with federal civil rights law

When enacted, the act provided protections where federal law was silent or weak, particularly in public accommodations and housing. While the Civil Rights Act of 1964 later established federal protections in public accommodations, the California act often set a higher standard with broader definitions and more inclusive categories. For example, protections based on sexual orientation and gender identity were included in California law decades before the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County. In housing, the Rumford Fair Housing Act (later incorporated into the state's framework) was more stringent than the federal Fair Housing Act of 1968. The act also allows for different enforcement mechanisms and remedies, often providing more avenues for plaintiffs than federal statutes like Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Enforcement and legal procedures

Violations of the act are enforced through civil lawsuits. Aggrieved individuals can file complaints with the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing, the state's primary civil rights agency. The department may investigate, pursue mediation, or issue an accusation leading to a hearing before the California Fair Employment and Housing Commission. Plaintiffs also have the right to file a private civil action in California Superior Court. Successful plaintiffs may obtain injunctive relief, actual damages, and statutory penalties. The act's provisions for attorney's fees and cost recovery are designed to encourage private enforcement. This administrative and judicial framework operates in parallel to federal agencies like the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

Notable cases and impact

The act has been central to many pivotal state court decisions that have shaped civil rights law. In Marina Point, Ltd. v. Wolfson (1982), the California Supreme Court used the act to strike down an apartment complex's policy excluding families with children. The case of Koire v. Metro Car Wash (1985) extended the act's protections to gender-based price discrimination. Its principles underpinned the landmark In re Marriage Cases decision in 2008, which held that limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples violated the state constitution. The act has profoundly influenced business practices, housing policies, and social norms within California, and its expansive approach has served as a model for legislation in other states and informed debates at the United States Congress.

Category:California law Category:1959 in California Category:Anti-discrimination law in the United States