July 13, 2020

Volume X, Number 195

July 13, 2020

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

Using Letters to the Daily Journals for Determining Legislative Intent; Compilation of California Assembly and Senate Letters from Bill Authors

One method to help ascertain the legislative intent behind a specified measure in California is a letter that is published in the Assembly Daily Journal or the Senate Daily Journal by the bill’s author. These letters, for which there are many each year, may be used by the bill’s author to explain an ambiguity in the bill or explain the purpose of particular changes in the law as done by the bill, for example.

In the Assembly and Senate, such a “letter to the journal” is a formal matter. The letter must be on the legislator’s letterhead and signed by that legislator. The general custom and practice of the two houses of the California Legislature is to have the respective leadership staff (both majority and minority parties) review the contents of the letter and determine whether they have any objections to the letter’s contents.

The policy consultants may request revisions to the letter. The Assembly Speaker’s office also reviews and approves letters, as does the Senate President pro tempore’s office. The two Republican Leaders in either house provide a similar review and approval.

If approval is not received by both sides of the aisle, then the legislator can request that the letter be printed in the Daily Journal with a roll call vote of the house. If that occurs, then a majority of those present and voting are required to approve the printing of the letter. So, while letters to the journal usually are printed with unanimous consent in the respective house, ultimately that is not necessary as only a majority of the legislators who vote on the motion to print the letter must vote to approve publishing it.

The courts in this state can utilize these letters as extrinsic aids in determining the intent of the Legislature. Different versions of the bill, committee and floor analyses, and other items are generally given greater weight than these letters. Nonetheless, a Journal letter may be the best indicator available regarding the intent of the bill’s author and so they should be consulted.

In an effort to assist those conducting legislative history and intent research, in Fall 2018, I reviewed 23 years’ worth of Assembly Daily Journals and 16 years’ worth of Senate Daily Journals in order to compile the two files attached to this cover note.

The first contains letters published in the Assembly Daily Journal from 1996 through 2018 and the second contains letters published in the Senate Daily Journal from 2003 through 2018. In both instances, these files are broken down by Legislative Session and then they list the bill number, bill author, subject matter of the bill, and page number from the respective Journal where the letter can be found and cited. 

© 2020 University of the Pacific, Calif. All rights reserved.National Law Review, Volume IX, Number 56


About this Author

Chris M. Micheli, Attorney, California legislative advocate eSacramento governmental relations firm of Aprea & Micheli
Adjunct Professor

Chris Micheli is an attorney and legislative advocate for the Sacramento governmental relations firm of Aprea & Micheli, Inc. As a lobbyist in the labor and employment field, he was directly involved in the development of California’s changes to its Equal Pay Act. The Wall Street Journal (July 1998) called him "one of the top three business tax lobbyists in the state." The Los Angeles Times (May 2005) described him as an "elite lobbyist," and Capitol Weekly (August 2006) described him as a "prominent lobbyist." He received his B.A. in Political Science - Public Service (1989) from the...

(916) 448-3075