Body

California lawmakers advanced two bills aimed at increasing protections for patients held in Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody after concerns that federal agents can isolate people receiving medical care from their families and attorneys and interfere with decisions during hospital stays.

Sen. Caroline Menjivar’s SB 915 would largely prohibit the use of “blackout” policies for patients in ICE custody. KFF Health News reporting cited by the lawmakers said some hospitals have used such policies to isolate patients, including registering them under pseudonyms, withholding their names from hospital directories, and preventing staff from contacting patients’ relatives to disclose where the patient is and what condition they are in.

Menjivar’s proposal also would set rules intended to preserve patients’ ability to communicate while in medical facilities. The bill would require that patients retain the right to have family members and others notified of their whereabouts and condition, allow visitors, and limit when a blackout policy could be used based on the health care provider’s determination that a patient poses a credible risk to the patient or others, with the risk documented in the patient’s medical record.

Menjivar’s bill would also seek to limit ICE access during medical treatment. Under the proposal, agents would not be allowed into patients’ rooms unless they can show legal authorization to be there. If agents remain in the room, staff would be required to ask them to leave during medical exams and discussions about patient care, and if agents refuse, health care facility staff would need to document the refusal.

A second bill, SB 1323, authored by Sen. Susan Rubio, would focus on notification and signage. It would require health care providers to inform facility staff and relevant volunteers about how to respond when patients want their families to know where they are, and it would require posted notices at facility entrances describing visitation and access policies. Rubio’s bill builds on an existing state requirement that patients can agree to have loved ones notified they are in the hospital.

At a legislative hearing supporting the bills, more than 20 immigrant rights advocates and health care workers urged lawmakers to strengthen protections for hospitalized people in immigration custody. Hector Pereyra, political manager with the Inland Coalition for Immigrant Justice, said the state must act to protect detainees’ rights to contact loved ones when they are hospitalized and in critical conditions.

The bills also drew opposition or caution from hospital and medical groups. Representatives of the California Hospital Association and the California Medical Association told lawmakers last week they had concerns that requiring staff to document agents’ badge numbers and ask them to leave patients’ rooms could create conflict and pose safety risks, particularly during real-time interactions with federal officers. Vanessa Gonzalez, a vice president of state advocacy for the hospital association, said the groups wanted the bills to “strike the right balance” and avoid unclear or conflicting obligations for hospitals and staff and clinicians.

The push for the legislation follows earlier California action that sought to limit ICE enforcement at health care facilities, including by restricting access by federal agents without a valid search warrant or court order into private areas. Advocates and lawmakers said those measures did not address cases in which ICE already has custody of the patient.

KFF Health News reporting described one case in which a detained patient in Victorville, Julio César Peña, was held at a hospital for almost two weeks before his attorney and family learned where he was. Peña died Feb. 25, less than two months after he was released to go home, and KFF Health News reported that he had terminal kidney disease and suffered a seizure that left him intubated and unconscious, without family notification.

The federal Department of Homeland Security, which oversees immigration enforcement, did not respond to a request for comment. Both bills were passed by the Senate Health and Judiciary committees along party lines and are scheduled next for consideration by the Senate Appropriations Committee.