Fact check: What other states have similar laws to California's AB 495?

1. Summary of the results

Based on the analyses provided, none of the sources identify other states with similar laws to California's AB 495 ^{[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]}. The Family Preparedness Plan Act of 2025 (AB 495) allows families to make temporary caregiving arrangements when facing separation due to immigration enforcement, incarceration, military deployment, illness, or other unforeseen circumstances ^{[1] [6]}.

The bill expands the definition of who can temporarily care for children, including non-relative extended family members, and streamlines the process for temporary guardianship without granting legal custody to caregivers ^{[2] [3]}. Multiple fact-checking sources confirm that criticisms claiming the bill facilitates child exploitation or trafficking are inaccurate or missing important context ^{[2] [3]}.

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The analyses reveal significant missing context regarding the scope and purpose of AB 495. The original question assumes knowledge of similar laws in other states, but the sources indicate this information is not readily available or documented ^{[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]}.

Alternative viewpoints include:

• Supporters like the Alliance for Children's Rights view the bill as providing crucial support for vulnerable families facing separation ^[4]
• Critics such as the Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA) argue the bill threatens parental rights and could undermine family integrity ^[5]
• Immigration advocacy perspective: The bill serves as a safety net specifically for families affected by immigration enforcement actions ^[6]

Organizations like HSLDA would benefit from opposing this legislation as it aligns with their mission to protect traditional parental authority, while children's rights organizations benefit from supporting expanded family support systems ^{[4] [5]}.

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question contains no apparent misinformation or bias - it is a straightforward factual inquiry about comparable state legislation. However, the question's framing suggests an assumption that similar laws exist in other states, which the available analyses cannot confirm ^{[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]}.

The analyses reveal that much of the public discourse surrounding AB 495 has been characterized by misinformation, with fact-checkers repeatedly debunking false claims about child exploitation and custody transfer ^{[2] [3]}. This suggests that accurate information about the bill's actual provisions and comparable legislation in other states may be difficult to obtain due to the polarized nature of the debate.