Latest news with #ShannonGrove
Yahoo
24-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
State Sen. Shannon Grove's child protection bill, sponsored by Paris Hilton, passes through appropriations committee
BAKERSFIELD, Calif. (KGET) — A bill introduced by Republican State Senator Shannon Grove — with support from Paris Hilton — that seeks to amend sections of the existing California Education Code for children in nonpublic schools advanced past the Senate Appropriations Committee on Friday, according to a press release by Grove's office. The committee voted to advance Senate Bill 373 during its hearing May 23. SB 373, sponsored by Hilton's nonprofit 11:11 Media Impact, aims to change the existing law surrounding education for children in out-of-state youth facilities to provide more information and safeguards to the children directly. Substitute teacher recognized with Golden Apple Award at Standard Middle School The existing law requires local educational agencies to assess children with 'exceptional needs' and provide them with free public education that is appropriate and unrestrictive. After assessing the students and providing the proper education, local agencies are required to provide a copy of the rights and procedural safeguards to the parents. The California Department of Education says if a parent cannot be identified, an individual may be assigned to serve as a surrogate parent for the parent of a child with disabilities. If passed, one of the changes in the bill would require local agencies to provide this information not only to the parents, but also to the children directly. Other changes include ensuring private and confidential communications between the child and the Equitable Services Ombudsman, such as quarterly check-ins with the child through unmonitored phone calls. Never miss a story: Make your homepage Grove (R-Bakersfield) said in a press release the bipartisan bill is meant to enhance safeguards for the most vulnerable students in California who are placed in out-of-state nonpublic schools and facilities. 'With nearly 300 California children still residing in these facilities, often far from home and with limited oversight, this legislation is a critical step forward,' Grove said. Senate Bill 373 will move forward to the Senate for a full floor vote. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
18-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Kern County In Depth: May 18, 2025
On this week's Kern County In Depth, a look at efforts being made in combatting human trafficking. After much debate and posturing, California lawmakers finally passed a bill that would make it a felony for predators who purchase 16- and 17-year-olds for sex. Maddie Janssen speaks with California Sen. Shannon Grove on the passage of the bill and efforts to protect human trafficking victims. Plus, an interview with June Nachor, vice chairwoman of the Tejon Indian tribe, who discusses efforts to fight the crime and the tragedy of murdered indigenous people. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
02-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Anti-sex trafficking of minors bill moves forward with amendment after heated debate
BAKERSFIELD, Calif. (KGET) — California lawmakers became engaged in a heated discussion after Democrats in the Assembly forced amendments to exclude 16- and 17-year-olds on the bill against the sex trafficking of minors. Assembly Bill 379, which originally intended to make it a felony to solicit and purchase any minor under the age of 18 for sex, received forced amendments by Democratic leaders earlier this week to exclude cases when minors aged 16 or 17 are purchased for sex. Democratic leaders said they were concerned about 16- and 17-year-old victims getting arrested for being forced to take part in illegal activity by traffickers. State Sen. Shannon Grove introduces bill for additional protection for sex trafficking victims They also added a new amendment saying, 'It is the intent of the legislature to adopt the strongest laws to protect 16- and 17-year-old victims and strengthen protections in support of survivors of human traffickers.' At the Assembly meeting on Thursday, Republicans and some Democrats said this amendment doesn't propose any clear action. That's when things got heated in the legislature. 'Wake up and realize you are on the wrong side of this issue,' Assemblymember Carl Demaio (R-San Diego) said. Never miss a story: Make your homepage Some Democrats argued including trafficking victims between the ages of 16 and 17 could have unintended consequences. 'There could be a situation in which there's a 18-year-old and 17-year-old that are in high school together,' Assemblymember Ash Kalra (D-San Jose) said. 'There is a wide range of conduct that prosecutor should be able to use their ability for discretion.' In the end, the majority of Democrats agreed to reject the Republican proposal to bring back the bill's original protections of 16- and 17-year-olds and instead approve their new amendments. Assembly Bill 379 now heads to the Assembly Appropriations Committee with the amendment. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
02-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Lawmakers react with ire to removal of 16- and 17-year-old victims from sex trafficking bill
California lawmakers including bill co-author Sen. Shannon Grove, R-Bakersfield, reacted with ire this week after protections for 16- and 17-year-olds were removed from legislation intended to issue greater penalties to sex traffickers. The Assembly Public Safety Committee removed these older teens from AB 379. 'AB 379 faced the same fate as SB 1414: Take out the felony charges for those who purchase 16- and 17-year-old kids for sex, or the bill is dead. This isn't keeping a 'deal,' it's an ultimatum from legislators failing to protect older teens from sex buyers, and it's unacceptable," Grove said in a statement. "I'm glad AB 379 is advancing, but the Assembly Public Safety Committee should have kept the original language," she continued. "We must keep fighting to protect ALL children and hold exploiters accountable." Assemblywoman Dr. Jasmeet Bains, D-Delano, also commented on AB 379, which proposed to make it a felony to purchase 16- and 17-year-old children for sex. 'We have to stop being the party of meaningless gestures and radical policies. Somehow — as the president tanks our economy and deports innocent children, the American people still don't trust Democrats," Bains said in a statement. "Any sane person knows that purchasing a 16-year-old girl for sex should be a felony. How is this a debate?' Meanwhile, Republican Assemblywoman Alexandra M. Macedo, who represents parts of Tulare, Fresno and Kings counties, said Democrats introduced "intent" language that has no prosecutorial or legal standing in the courts, creating "smoke and mirrors" in the pretense to protect 16- and 17-year-olds from sex trafficking. 'If a 16- and a 17-year-old child cannot give consent in the eyes of the law, then why in God's name are they not protected under the same law? How many more children will go through the trauma of being purchased by pedophiles before actual action is being taken?" Macedo asked in a written statement. 'Intent does not carry any weight in the courtroom or bring victims of these heinous acts justice."
Fox News
01-05-2025
- Politics
- Fox News
CA Dems Seek New Lows
California Democrats just can't find it in their hearts to treat buying minors for sex as a felony. I wish I were shocked. I'm Tomi Lahren, more next. The debate in the CA legislature over whether to make it a felony to buy a 16 or 17 year old for sex has been shut down. Republican State Senator Shannon Grove first introduced the proposal to make that despicable act a felony but she couldn't convince Democrats to go that far so last year they struck a 'deal' to ALLOW the felony charge to ONLY apply to those who purchased children under 16 for sex. The dirtbags who purchase a 16 or 17 year old could face a misdemeanor OR felony based on the discretion of local prosecutors. Oh, and the older teens would also have to PROVE they're being trafficked. Back even that so-called 'deal' was too tough for Democrats in the Assembly Public Safety Committee. This week they blocked a proposal to make it a felony and the gutted and just the soft version goes forward. Why would ANYONE want to go soft on those who buy 16 or 17 year olds for sex? Only in California, folks. GET OUT WHILE YOU CAN! I'm Tomi Lahren and you watch my show 'Tomi Lahren is Fearless' at Learn more about your ad choices. Visit
