Official Summary Text
SB 1243, as amended, Durazo.
Unlawful detainer: Tenant Protections for Immigrant Families Act of 2026.
Existing law provides that a tenant is guilty of unlawful detainer if the tenant continues to possess the property without permission of the landlord after the tenant defaults on rent or fails to perform a condition or covenant of the lease under which the property is held, among other reasons. Existing law requires a tenant to be served a 3 days’ notice in writing to cure a default or perform a condition of the lease, or return possession of the property to the landlord, as specified.
This bill, the Tenant Protections for Immigrant Families Act of 2026, would, until January 1, 2030, prohibit an owner of residential real property, as defined, from initiating or continuing an unlawful detainer action to evict a tenant whose income, ability to obtain income, or financial
support,
support
is impacted by immigration enforcement activities until 180 days after the conclusion of those immigration enforcement activities, as specified. The bill would require a tenant to submit a declaration of detention-related hardship to the owner that includes a specified statement
signed under penalty of perjury
in order for these protections to take effect.
Any person who knowingly provides false information in the declaration would be subject to a civil fine of up to $1,500.
The bill would require a court to stay the proceeding of a pending unlawful detainer action against a covered tenant if certain conditions are satisfied, including that the tenant provides the court with documentation that the tenant or household member suffered a detention-related hardship that prevented
them from paying the unpaid rent alleged in the unlawful detainer action. The bill would prohibit the owner from charging or collecting any late fees, interest, or other penalties related to the nonpayment of rent by a tenant subject to these provisions.
For purposes of the Act, this bill would define “immigration enforcement activities” to include any efforts to investigate, enforce, or assist in the investigation or enforcement of any federal immigration law, including any federal criminal immigration law that penalizes a person’s presence in, entry or reentry to, or employment in, the United States. The bill would define “detention-related hardship” to mean, among other things, loss of income or financial support by the tenant or household member due to immigration enforcement activities and the loss of income or increased costs or out-of-pocket expenses due to effects sustained by the tenant or household member from immigration enforcement activities.
This bill would require a 3 days’ notice to cure a default or perform a condition of the lease, or return possession of the property to the landlord, to include a specified statement advising the tenant that they cannot be evicted for failure to comply with the notice if the tenant delivers a signed declaration of detention-related hardship to the landlord within 15 days.
This bill would prohibit a landlord from charging a tenant subject to these provisions fees assessed for the late payment of that rental debt. The bill would prohibit a person from selling or assigning any unpaid debt as a result of detention-related hardship. The bill would prohibit a housing provider or tenant screening company from using an alleged debt as a result of detention-related hardship as a negative factor for the purpose of evaluating a prospective housing application or as the basis for refusing to rent a dwelling unit to an otherwise qualified
prospective tenant. The bill would delete similar provisions related to debts as a result of COVID-19 rental debt.
The bill would require the Judicial Council to review its existing forms and develop new forms to effectuate these provisions.
The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2030.
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.