Threats of mass shootings or bombs at schools or places of worship have become increasingly commonplace. But some prosecutors say if the person who made the threat didn’t name a specific individual they were targeting, it’s harder to legally charge them.
One legislator from Los Angeles County wants to close a loophole in existing state law by clarifying that anyone who makes a credible threat to commit mass violence against such institutions — even if the threat isn’t directed at a specific person — can be prosecuted under state Penal Code 422.
The Safe Schools and Places of Worship Act, introduced by state Sen. Susan Rubio, D-Baldwin Park, passed out of the Senate Public Safety Committee on Tuesday, March 25, with unanimous support from committee members. It now awaits a hearing in the appropriations committee.
During Tuesday’s committee hearing, Rubio said current state law “falls short” of ensuring law enforcement officials have the tools to address such incidents — and to deter people from making these threats in the first place.
“Threats against our schools disrupt so much of what we do, not only learning, but it really traumatizes our children and our teachers. And it leaves everyone, the entire community, in fear,” said Rubio, who spent two decades as a teacher.
“No parent should ever have to wonder if their kids are safe, and it’s happening more and more. Not only schools but, again, places of worship continue to see a lot of threats,” she added.
Beyond the emotional trauma that comes with these threats, Rubio said law enforcement has to treat threats as credible until they know for sure there’s no imminent danger. Each incident response costs on average $100,000, she said.
The California District Attorneys Association, California Police Chiefs Association, California School Police Chiefs Association and the California School Employees Association support the bill.
Those opposed include the American Civil Liberties Union of California, Disability Rights California and various groups that advocate for youth restorative justice.
Margo George, on behalf of the California Public Defenders Association and the San Francisco Public Defender’s Office, spoke in opposition to SB 19 during Tuesday’s hearing.
She called these “very painful times,” with many young people and those who suffer from mental illness taking out their frustrations on schools and places of worship. That aside, she said there are other areas of the state penal code under which people already may be charged for making threats to schools or churches and did not see the need for the proposed bill.
“The law is adequate already to deal with this kind of behavior,” George said. “SB 19 will not make us safer.”
Critics of the bill raised concerns about the potential impact on young people, in particular, who make threats as a prank or who make a threatening comment while venting, with no real intention to carry out harm. Focusing on restorative justice would make more sense, they said.
According to Rubio’s office, the intent of the bill is to hold accountable individuals who commit credible threats, not to criminalize students whose behavior does not meet the legal definition of a credible threat.
In addition, supporters of the bill noted that a minor who makes a credible threat could be charged with a felony under current law. But SB 19 would amend the law so that people under 18 who make these threats could only be charged with a misdemeanor.
SB 19 is co-authored by Sens. Catherine Blakespear, D-Encinitas, and Roger Niello, R-Fair Oaks, and Assemblymembers Marc Berman, D-Menlo Park, and Blanca Rubio, D-Baldwin Park.
Rubio co-introduced a similar bill last legislative session, but it failed to advance out of the legislature.