Plain English Breakdown
The exact list of acceptable diacritical marks is not defined in this text and will be determined later by the State Registrar.
AB-64: Updating Vital Records with Accurate Name Marks
This law requires California to record special marks on letters in names for vital records if needed, allows people to fix missing marks later using sworn statements, and raises the extra fee for getting certified copies of these documents.
What This Bill Does
- Requires state officials to accept diacritical marks (like accents) on English letters in name fields on birth, death, fetal death, and marriage records starting no earlier than two years after funding is approved by the Legislature.
- States that a document remains valid even if it has or lacks a diacritical mark; the missing mark does not make the record wrong or affect legal notice.
- Allows people to file an affidavit with proof from one other person who knows the facts to correct names on existing records by adding missing marks beginning July 1, 2026.
- Authorizes state officials to remove these special marks before sharing vital statistics data with federal, state, or local government agencies.
- Increases the extra fee for certified copies of birth, death, fetal death, marriage, and divorce records from $3 to $5.
Who It Names or Affects
- The State Registrar of Vital Statistics
- Local registrars of births and deaths
- County clerks who issue confidential marriage licenses
- People applying for certified copies or corrections on vital records
Terms To Know
- Diacritical mark
- A symbol added to a letter, such as an accent (é) or umlaut (ü), that changes how the name is pronounced.
- Affidavit
- A written statement of facts made under oath before a notary public or other official authorized by law.
- Vital records
- Official documents that record life events, including births, deaths, fetal deaths, and marriages.
Limits and Unknowns
- The requirement to use diacritical marks will not start until at least two years after the Legislature approves funding.
- The bill does not specify which exact symbols count as acceptable diacritical marks; the State Registrar must create that list later through instructions rather than formal regulations.
- It is unclear if state reimbursement for local costs will be required, depending on a future decision by the Commission on State Mandates.