BaneAct.com

Bane Act, aka, the Tom Bane Act, aka Bane Civil Rights Act (California Civil Code § 52.1)

California Civil Code Section 52.1 (the Bane Act) prohibits any person from using violent acts or threatening to commit violent acts in retaliation against another person for exercising that person’s constitutional rights.

Is the Bane Act a federal law? No, the Bane Act is not a federal law.

Is the Bane Act only in California?

Yes, the Bane Civil Rights Act is a California state law. But it protects people whose state or federal rights are interfered with by threats, intimidation, or coercion and attorney's fees are available for plaintiffs'

CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE - CIV DIVISION

1. PERSONS [38 - 86] ( Heading of Division 1 amended by Stats. 1988, Ch. 160, Sec. 12. ) PART 2. PERSONAL RIGHTS ( Part 2 enacted 1872. )

52.1.  

(a) This section shall be known, and may be cited, as the Tom Bane Civil Rights Act.

(b) If a person or persons, whether or not acting under color of law, interferes by threat, intimidation, or coercion, or attempts to interfere by threat, intimidation, or coercion, with the exercise or enjoyment by any individual or individuals of rights secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or of the rights secured by the Constitution or laws of this state, the Attorney General, or any district attorney or city attorney may bring a civil action for injunctive and other appropriate equitable relief in the name of the people of the State of California, in order to protect the peaceable exercise or enjoyment of the right or rights secured. An action brought by the Attorney General, any district attorney, or any city attorney may also seek a civil penalty of twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000). If this civil penalty is requested, it shall be assessed individually against each person who is determined to have violated this section and the penalty shall be awarded to each individual whose rights under this section are determined to have been violated.

(c) Any individual whose exercise or enjoyment of rights secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or of rights secured by the Constitution or laws of this state, has been interfered with, or attempted to be interfered with, as described in subdivision (b), may institute and prosecute in their own name and on their own behalf a civil action for damages, including, but not limited to, damages under Section 52, injunctive relief, and other appropriate equitable relief to protect the peaceable exercise or enjoyment of the right or rights secured, including appropriate equitable and declaratory relief to eliminate a pattern or practice of conduct as described in subdivision (b).

(d) An action brought pursuant to subdivision (b) or (c) may be filed either in the superior court for the county in which the conduct complained of occurred or in the superior court for the county in which a person whose conduct complained of resides or has their place of business. An action brought by the Attorney General pursuant to subdivision (b) also may be filed in the superior court for any county wherein the Attorney General has an office, and in that case, the jurisdiction of the court shall extend throughout the state.

(e) If a court issues a temporary restraining order or a preliminary or permanent injunction in an action brought pursuant to subdivision (b) or (c), ordering a defendant to refrain from conduct or activities, the order issued shall include the following statement: VIOLATION OF THIS ORDER IS A CRIME PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 422.77 OF THE PENAL CODE.

(f) The court shall order the plaintiff or the attorney for the plaintiff to deliver, or the clerk of the court to mail, two copies of any order, extension, modification, or termination thereof granted pursuant to this section, by the close of the business day on which the order, extension, modification, or termination was granted, to each local law enforcement agency having jurisdiction over the residence of the plaintiff and any other locations where the court determines that acts of violence against the plaintiff are likely to occur. Those local law enforcement agencies shall be designated by the plaintiff or the attorney for the plaintiff. Each appropriate law enforcement agency receiving any order, extension, or modification of any order issued pursuant to this section shall serve forthwith one copy thereof upon the defendant. Each appropriate law enforcement agency shall provide to any law enforcement officer responding to the scene of reported violence, information as to the existence of, terms, and current status of, any order issued pursuant to this section.

(g) A court shall not have jurisdiction to issue an order or injunction under this section, if that order or injunction would be prohibited under Section 527.3 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

(h) An action brought pursuant to this section is independent of any other action, remedy, or procedure that may be available to an aggrieved individual under any other provision of law, including, but not limited to, an action, remedy, or procedure brought pursuant to Section 51.7.

(i) In addition to any damages, injunction, or other equitable relief awarded in an action brought pursuant to subdivision (c), the court may award the petitioner or plaintiff reasonable attorney’s fees.

(j) A violation of an order described in subdivision (e) may be punished either by prosecution under Section 422.77 of the Penal Code, or by a proceeding for contempt brought pursuant to Title 5 (commencing with Section 1209) of Part 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure. However, in any proceeding pursuant to the Code of Civil Procedure, if it is determined that the person proceeded against is guilty of the contempt charged, in addition to any other relief, a fine may be imposed not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), or the person may be ordered imprisoned in a county jail not exceeding six months, or the court may order both the imprisonment and fine.

(k) Speech alone is not sufficient to support an action brought pursuant to subdivision (b) or (c), except upon a showing that the speech itself threatens violence against a specific person or group of persons; and the person or group of persons against whom the threat is directed reasonably fears that, because of the speech, violence will be committed against them or their property and that the person threatening violence had the apparent ability to carry out the threat.

(l) No order issued in any proceeding brought pursuant to subdivision (b) or (c) shall restrict the content of any person’s speech. An order restricting the time, place, or manner of any person’s speech shall do so only to the extent reasonably necessary to protect the peaceable exercise or enjoyment of constitutional or statutory rights, consistent with the constitutional rights of the person sought to be enjoined.

(m) The rights, penalties, remedies, forums, and procedures of this section shall not be waived by contract except as provided in Section 51.7.

(n) The state immunity provisions provided in Sections 821.6, 844.6, and 845.6 of the Government Code shall not apply to any cause of action brought against any peace officer or custodial officer, as those terms are defined in Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 830) of Title 3 of Part 2 of the Penal Code, or directly against a public entity that employs a peace officer or custodial officer, under this section.

(o) Sections 825, 825.2, 825.4, and 825.6 of the Government Code, providing for indemnification of an employee or former employee of a public entity, shall apply to any cause of action brought under this section against an employee or former employee of a public entity.

(Amended by Stats. 2021, Ch. 409, Sec. 3. (SB 2) Effective January 1, 2022.)

Sample Bane Act Pleading:

1. Violation of Bane Act (Cal. Civil Code § 52.1(b)) (Plaintiff against Defendants CATTOLICO, PELAYO, VAN SCOY, LEANO, TESTERMAN, ALLEN, GIOVANNONI, DOES 1-50, and CITY OF SAN RAMON) 65. Plaintiff re-alleges the information set forth in the preceding paragraphs and incorporates them into this cause of action as if they were fully alleged herein. 66. California Civil Code Section 52.1 (the Bane Act) prohibits any person from using violent acts or threatening to commit violent acts in retaliation against another person for exercising that person’s constitutional rights.
2. Conduct that violates the Fourth Amendment violates the California Bane Act.*
3. On information and belief, Defendant CATTOLICO, with assistance from Defendants PELAYO, VAN SCOY, LEANO, TESTERMAN, ALLEN, GIOVANNONI, and DOES 1-50, as integral participants acting under color of law, while representing the CITY OF SAN RAMON and acting within the course and scope of their duties, committed acts of violence against BADR including using unreasonable and excessive force, by deliberately and intentionally deploying a police K-9 to attack and bite the Plaintiff without justification or excuse, integrally participating and failing to intervene in the above violence. Defendants’ actions thus deprived Plaintiff of his right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures and excessive force under the Fourth Amendment.
4. On information and belief, Defendants intentionally and spitefully committed the above acts to discourage Plaintiff from exercising his civil rights, to retaliate against him for invoking such rights, or to prevent him from exercising such rights, which he was fully entitled to enjoy.
5. On information and belief, Plaintiff reasonably believed and understood that the violent acts committed by Defendants CATTOLICO, PELAYO, VAN SCOY, LEANO, TESTERMAN, ALLEN, GIOVANNONI, were intended to discourage him from exercising his civil rights, to retaliate against him for invoking such rights, or to prevent him from exercising such rights.
6. Defendants’ above-described conduct, while acting within the course and scope of their duties for the CITY OF SAN RAMON, constituted interference, and attempted interference, by threats, intimidation, and coercion, with decedent's peaceable exercise and enjoyment of rights secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States and the State of California, in violation of California Civil Code §52.1.
7. The conduct of Defendants was a substantial factor in causing Plaintiff’s harms, losses, injuries, and damages.
8. Defendant CITY OF SAN RAMON is vicariously liable for the wrongful acts of Defendant CATTOLICO, with assistance from Defendants PELAYO, VAN SCOY, LEANO, TESTERMAN, ALLEN, GIOVANNONI pursuant to section 815.2(a) of the California Government Code, which provides that a public entity is liable for the injuries caused by its employees within the scope of employment if the employee’s act would subject him or her to liability.
9. Defendants DOES 2-10 are vicariously liable under California law and the doctrine of respondeat superior.
10. The conduct of Defendants was malicious, wanton, oppressive, and accomplished with a conscious disregard for Plaintiff’s rights, justifying an award of exemplary and punitive damages as to Defendants CATTOLICO, PELAYO, VAN SCOY, LEANO, TESTERMAN, ALLEN, GIOVANNONI.
11. Plaintiff also seeks attorney fees under this claim.

*See Chaudhry v. City of Los Angeles, 2014 WL 2030195, at *6 (9th Cir. May 19, 2014) (citing Cameron v. Craig, 713 F.3d 1012, 1022 (9th Cir. 2013).