Fact check: What are the main provisions of California Assembly Bill 495?

1. Summary of the results

California Assembly Bill 495, known as the Family Preparedness Plan Act of 2025, contains several key provisions designed to protect children facing potential family separation:

Primary Provisions:

• Expanded caregiver authorization: The bill expands who can execute a caregiver's authorization affidavit to include "nonrelative extended family members" who have established familial or mentoring relationships with the child ^{[1] [2]}
• School enrollment and medical care rights: Authorized caregivers gain the legal right to enroll minors in school and consent to school-related medical care on behalf of the minor, with the same rights given to guardians ^{[1] [2] [3]}
• Standardized recognition: The bill standardizes the recognition of caregiver's authorization affidavits across California ^[2]
• Model policies for institutions: The bill establishes model policies for local educational agencies and licensed child day care facilities to limit assistance with immigration enforcement ^[2]

Target populations: The legislation specifically aims to help families facing separation due to immigration enforcement, incarceration, or other circumstances ^[2].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original question lacks important context about the significant controversy surrounding this bill:

Opposition perspective: California pastors and parental rights groups have raised serious concerns that the bill is "too broad" and could strip parents of their authority to make school-related medical decisions for their children ^{[4] [3]}. Critics argue the legislation could potentially be exploited by "human traffickers, pedophiles, and kidnappers" ^[4].

Legal clarifications: The bill's sponsor has clarified that AB 495 "does not create any form of legal or physical custody under California law" ^[4], which directly contradicts some critics' interpretations.

Fact-checking perspective: Independent fact-checkers have found that claims about the bill allowing "strangers to take custody of children without parental consent" are "false or lacking important context" ^[5].

Political mobilization: The controversy has led to organized opposition, with California pastors leading rallies at the state capitol and warning parents to "flee the state" if the bill passes ^[4].

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question itself appears neutral and factual, simply asking for information about the bill's provisions without making claims or expressing bias. However, the question's neutrality may inadvertently obscure the highly polarized debate surrounding this legislation.

The missing context reveals that different stakeholders have dramatically different interpretations of what the same legal text means in practice. Immigrant rights advocates would benefit from expanded protections for vulnerable children, while parental rights groups and religious organizations see the bill as a threat to traditional family authority structures. This suggests the bill sits at the intersection of immigration policy, family law, and parental rights - all highly contentious political issues in California.