When Seconds Matter, California Shouldn’t Tie the Hands of Law Enforcement

Imagine your child has been abducted, and investigators learn they’ve already been taken across state lines. Or a human trafficking ring is operating in multiple counties. Or fentanyl pouring into our communities is traced back to an interstate criminal network.

In those moments, who do you want your local police department calling?

The answer is simple: every resource available.

At a time when we’re asking local law enforcement to do more than ever before—with fewer officers, fewer resources, and tighter budgets—SB 1105 moves California in exactly the wrong direction. Instead of strengthening the partnerships that help solve our toughest cases, it risks creating new barriers between local and federal law enforcement at a time when cooperation has never been more important.

Since COVID-19, police departments across California have struggled to rebuild their ranks while criminal organizations have become more sophisticated and better connected. Our local officers work tirelessly to keep our communities safe, but they cannot do it alone.

Every day they rely on partnerships with agencies like the FBI, Homeland Security Investigations, the DEA, the ATF, the U.S.

Marshals Service, and the Secret Service. These agencies bring specialized investigators, intelligence, forensic technology, and the ability to pursue criminals across state lines—resources that many local departments simply cannot replicate.

Those partnerships are critical when investigating human trafficking, child sexual exploitation, kidnappings, cartel activity, interstate gangs, financial crimes, cybercrime, and fentanyl trafficking. Criminals don’t respect city limits or state borders, and our law enforcement partnerships shouldn’t be weakened by politics.

Supporters of SB 1105 say the bill protects civil liberties. Protecting constitutional rights is one of the foundations of our justice system, and it should never be compromised. But protecting civil liberties and protecting public safety are not competing goals. California should be able to accomplish both.

One provision of this bill raises an important question for the residents of the 45th Assembly District.

SB 1105 preserves certain law enforcement relationships involving tribal agencies. I support making sure tribal communities have the resources they need to stay safe. But if preserving these partnerships is important for one community, why isn’t it important for every community?

Families in San Bernardino, Highland, Rialto, Fontana, Redlands, Mentone, and every other city in our district deserve the same commitment to public safety. They deserve the same ability for their local officers to work seamlessly with federal partners when pursuing violent criminals and protecting victims.

AssemblymanJames Ramos (D-San Bernardino), represents every resident of the 45th Assembly District. I believe he should be fighting to ensure every city receives the same consideration—not creating a system where some agencies are protected while others face greater uncertainty.

California should be giving law enforcement every lawful tool available to protect our families—not making their jobs harder.

When seconds matter, politics should never stand between our communities and the resources needed to save lives. That is why I oppose SB 1105.