CA SB13

Oil and gas.

Failed Senate Shannon Grove (R)
Plain English Summary

California Senate Bill 13 (SB13), introduced by Senator Shannon Grove in December 2024, aimed to enhance transparency regarding the origins of oil imported into California. The bill proposed that the California Energy Commission monitor and publicly disclose which foreign countries exporting oil to California have documented human rights abuses, as identified by the U.S. Department of State, and which have environmental standards for oil production that are lower than those of California. The bill sought to add Section 39619.9 to the Health and Safety Code to implement these provisions. However, SB13 did not pass; it was returned to the Secretary of the Senate on February 2, 2026, pursuant to Joint Rule 56, indicating it failed to advance through the legislative process.

Supporters Say

Supporters of SB13 likely appreciated its intent to promote ethical sourcing of oil by increasing transparency about the human rights and environmental practices of oil-exporting countries. By requiring the California Energy Commission to identify and disclose such information, the bill aimed to inform consumers and policymakers, potentially encouraging the state to source oil from countries with higher standards. This approach could have aligned with California's broader environmental and human rights objectives, fostering more responsible consumption and procurement practices.

Critics Say

Critics of SB13 may have raised concerns about the practicality and implications of the proposed monitoring and disclosure requirements. They might have argued that the bill could strain diplomatic relations with oil-exporting countries by publicly highlighting their human rights and environmental shortcomings. Additionally, opponents could have contended that implementing such measures would increase administrative burdens on the California Energy Commission and potentially lead to higher oil prices if the state sought to limit imports from certain countries. There may also have been skepticism about the effectiveness of the bill in achieving meaningful change in global human rights and environmental practices.

Legislative Votes
Placed on suspense file
Senate · Apr 28, 2025
Passed
7
YEA
0
NAY
Do pass as amended, but first amend, and re-refer to the Committee on [Appropriations]
Senate · Apr 7, 2025
Passed
16
YEA
0
NAY
Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Energy, Utilities and Communications] with the recommendation: To Consent Calendar
Senate · Mar 19, 2025
Passed
8
YEA
0
NAY

Source: LegiScan roll call vote data.

TheBillRoom is free and independent. No ads, no subscriptions, no political funding. If this analysis was useful, reader support keeps it running.
Support Us

About This Analysis

This summary was generated using AI from the bill's official text and metadata. Data sourced from LegiScan and the California State Legislature. Conflict-of-interest analysis for this bill is coming soon.