California SB 345 (reproductive and gender-affirming care shield law)

What SB 345 actually does

SB 345 is California's shield law for reproductive and gender-affirming care. It uses the same approach as AB 1242: it restricts what California law enforcement agencies can do to help out-of-state investigations into legally protected health care. AB 1242 covered abortion. SB 345 covers reproductive care and gender-affirming care that is legal in California, and it applies the same data-sharing restriction. California agencies cannot share personal data with out-of-state law enforcement in covered cases.

The bill was signed in September 2023, and its main provisions took effect January 1, 2024.

If you read AB 1242 first, this page will feel familiar. The legislature built SB 345 on the same framework and extended it to a broader set of protected care. The training bulletins agencies issued treat the two together, because they operate together.

Who it protects

The protected group:

• People in California who received reproductive or gender-affirming care that is legal in California
• Providers of that care, including physicians, nurses, mental health professionals, and clinic staff
• People who assisted, such as someone who drove a patient, paid for care, scheduled appointments, or provided lodging

Under California law, "legally protected health care activity" is defined broadly. It covers medical, surgical, and mental health care tied to reproductive and gender-related care. The statute is built around what is legal in California, not what is legal in the requesting state.

For California law enforcement personnel, the protection is the same shape as AB 1242. It does not shield you from doxxing. It limits your agency's obligation to share your records, or anyone else's records, across state lines in a covered case.

How to invoke

There is nothing for an individual to file. SB 345 is not a personal opt-out. It works as a restriction on your employer agency's behavior.

Practical scenarios:

1. Out-of-state subpoena on a covered case: your records unit and legal advisor analyze it under SB 345 and decide whether to comply, comply in part, or move to quash.
2. Information request from a sister agency in another state: your records unit applies the statute. If the request touches covered care, the answer is no.
3. Multi-state task force pulling data: same analysis. Personal data on covered care is not shared.

If a request comes in that seems to touch reproductive or gender-affirming care, push it up to your supervisor and your agency's legal counsel. The statute is the legal basis they will use.

Where it does and doesn't reach

Covered:

• Personal data held by California law enforcement agencies
• Out-of-state data-sharing requests on covered cases
• Investigations into reproductive or gender-affirming care that is legal in California

Not covered:

• Data brokers. Spokeo, BeenVerified, Whitepages, and Pipl are not agencies. SB 345 does not touch them.
• Federal investigations. The statute governs interstate state-to-state cooperation, not federal-to-state.
• Care that was not legal in California. The statute is built around the legal-in-California piece.
• Your personal address, phone, and family information in commercial databases. That is the broker layer, not the agency layer.

Why this matters for first responder privacy

SB 345 is the second California statute that restricts law enforcement data flow across state lines for a specific protected category. AB 1242 was the first. Together they show that when California decides to protect a class of conduct, it is willing to constrain its own agencies' data-sharing behavior to back it up.

For first responder privacy specifically, that direction matters more than the specific topic. The legislature has said, in more than one statute, that California agencies do not share personal data with out-of-state law enforcement in these cases. The framework exists, and it can be applied to other protected categories.

For your actual privacy exposure, meaning your home address, phone, family information, and prior addresses circulating across broker sites, SB 345 does nothing directly. The relevant tools there are the Delete Act and DROP platform, Vehicle Code §1808.4, and Government Code §6254.21.

How California agencies were trained

Some California agencies issued training that pairs SB 345 with AB 1242. The Culver City PD 2025 training bulletin walks officers through both statutes side by side and lays out the operational picture.

Common guidance in those bulletins:

• Out-of-state requests on covered cases route to the agency's legal advisor, not the line.
• Do not volunteer information to out-of-state agencies on covered topics.
• Personal-data sharing across state lines in covered cases is prohibited.

If your agency has not issued specific training on SB 345, the AB 1242 guidance is a close guide. The analysis is the same; the covered category is broader.

What we do

SB 345, like AB 1242, works at the agency level. There is nothing an individual files. The broker layer is where we work. We scan data broker sites on a recurring basis, file opt-out requests, and file again when a broker re-lists you. Agency restrictions like SB 345 close one route to your information. Broker removals close another.

For California first responders, the practical move is to submit a DROP request under the Delete Act and run a free scan to see what is still live in the broker layer.