Full Breakdown
California Bill Aims to Limit Governor's Emergency Powers
2/16/2026, 6:00:26 AM
Proposed Legislation Overview
Assembly Bill 1835, introduced by Assemblymember James Gallagher, a Republican from Chico, seeks to limit the duration of a state of emergency declared by the governor of California to 90 days. Any extension beyond this period would require a vote from the Legislature. Gallagher's proposal is a direct response to the extensive use of emergency powers by Governor Gavin Newsom during the COVID-19 pandemic, which began with a state of emergency declaration on March 4, 2020, and lasted until February 28, 2023.
Legislative Intent and Context
Gallagher argues that while it is essential for governors to act swiftly in emergencies, there must be checks and balances in place. He stated, “There needs to be a balance,” emphasizing the need for legislative oversight during prolonged emergencies. The bill aims to amend the California Emergency Services Act, originally established in 1970, which grants governors significant authority to manage emergencies, including the ability to issue executive orders without immediate legislative approval.
Historical Background
During the COVID-19 pandemic, Governor Newsom issued 58 executive orders, including stay-at-home mandates and business closures. These actions faced legal challenges, with courts largely upholding the governor's decisions, citing the unprecedented nature of the crisis. Gallagher contends that the pandemic highlighted a lack of legislative oversight, prompting the need for reform.
Key Perspectives
Gallagher has expressed concerns about what he describes as "gross abuses of executive power" during the pandemic, including the unilateral closure of businesses and changes to election laws through executive orders. Legislative analyst Chris Micheli noted that narrowing the scope of the Emergency Services Act is necessary to address concerns regarding legislative oversight. He stated, “The only ability to change that or to narrow the scope of the governor’s power is to narrow the Emergency Services Act.”
Official Responses
The governor's office has not commented on the pending legislation, adhering to a policy of not discussing bills in progress. Other lawmakers have also refrained from providing comments at this stage. As the bill is set to be reviewed in its first committee hearing in the coming weeks, further discussions among legislators are anticipated.
Criticism and Opposition
While the bill has garnered support from Gallagher and some lawmakers, it has not yet received public commentary from various stakeholders, including local businesses and restaurant representatives. Their silence may indicate a wait-and-see approach as the bill progresses through the legislative process.
What's Next
The proposed legislation will undergo its first committee hearing soon, where it will be evaluated further. Should it advance, it is expected to provoke more extensive discussions among legislators regarding the balance of power between the governor and the Legislature in times of emergency.
