California Assembly Bill 2223 bars criminal charges, civil lawsuits, and professional penalties against anyone who experiences a miscarriage, stillbirth, abortion, or perinatal death from causes that occurred in the womb, and it extends the same protection to people who help them with consent. The governor signed the bill on September 27, 2022, and it took effect January 1, 2023.1California Legislative Information. Assembly Bill 2223 – Reproductive Health
The law amended Government Code Section 27491 and several sections of the Health and Safety Code, added new Sections 123467 and 123469, and repealed the former Section 103000. It did not rewrite the Penal Code’s murder statute. Section 187 already exempted the pregnant person from prosecution for a fetal death; AB 2223 layered a broader shield on top through the Health and Safety Code.2California Legislative Information. California Assembly Bill 2223 – Reproductive Health
What the Immunity Covers
Health and Safety Code Section 123467 is the core of the law. It provides that no person can be charged with a crime, sued for damages, penalized, or otherwise deprived of their reproductive rights because of anything they did or did not do in connection with their own pregnancy outcome. That includes miscarriage, stillbirth, abortion, and perinatal death resulting from causes that occurred while the fetus was in the womb.3California Legislative Information. California Code HSC 123467
The phrase “perinatal death due to causes that occurred in utero” carries real weight. It limits the immunity to deaths traceable to something that happened during pregnancy itself: a complication, a medical condition, a failed intervention. A newborn death caused by post-birth neglect or abuse is not covered, because the cause did not occur in utero.
The immunity runs across the whole enforcement system. No investigation, no prosecution, no civil suit, no licensing action. Before AB 2223, a person who experienced a pregnancy loss could face a coroner’s inquiry that escalated into criminal proceedings. Now, a pregnancy outcome alone cannot be the basis for any legal consequence against the pregnant person.
People Who Help Are Protected Too
Section 123467 also shields anyone who assists a pregnant person in exercising their reproductive rights, provided the pregnant person consented. A partner who drives someone to a clinic, a friend who pays for medication, a healthcare provider who performs the procedure: all are protected from criminal charges and civil suits based solely on that assistance.3California Legislative Information. California Code HSC 123467
Where the Immunity Ends
AB 2223 does not authorize every abortion in every circumstance. Section 123468 defines an abortion as unauthorized when it is performed by someone other than the pregnant person and either of two conditions is met: the person performing it is not a licensed healthcare provider authorized under Business and Professions Code Section 2253, or the fetus is viable and continued pregnancy poses no risk to the life or health of the pregnant person.4California Legislative Information. California Code HSC 123468
The viability line remains intact for procedures that do not involve a health risk, and only authorized providers can perform abortions on another person. Section 123467’s immunity covers the pregnant person’s own actions and those who assist with her consent. It does not cover unlicensed third parties acting outside those bounds.
What Coroners and Death Certificates Can No Longer Do
Before AB 2223, the Government Code directed coroners to investigate deaths related to “known or suspected self-induced or criminal abortion.” That language predated Roe but remained on the books, and coroners sometimes used it to open investigations into pregnancy losses. AB 2223 struck it from Section 27491.5California State Senate Judiciary Committee. AB 2223 Wicks Senate Judiciary Committee Analysis
The bill also repealed former Health and Safety Code Section 103000, which had required that an unattended fetal death be handled as a death without medical attendance. That classification automatically triggered a coroner investigation. Removing it closes a route that could funnel routine pregnancy losses into the investigative system.
Section 103005 now explicitly prohibits using anything stated on a fetal death certificate to start, support, or maintain a criminal prosecution or civil damages claim against any person immune under Section 123467.6California Legislative Information. California Code HSC 103005 Even if a coroner records details about the circumstances of a fetal death, that document cannot become evidence against a protected person. An investigation is only permissible where there is independent evidence of criminal activity unrelated to the pregnancy itself, such as domestic violence.
Reproductive Privacy Beyond Abortion
AB 2223 sits inside California’s Reproductive Privacy Act. The amended Section 123462 declares that every person has a fundamental right of privacy over personal reproductive decisions. That covers prenatal care, childbirth, postpartum care, contraception, sterilization, miscarriage management, and infertility treatment, not just abortion.7California Legislative Information. California Code HSC 123462
Section 123466 prohibits the state from interfering with the right to obtain an abortion before fetal viability, or at any point when the abortion is necessary to protect the life or health of the pregnant person. It also blocks California proceedings from being used to identify someone who sought or obtained an abortion when the information request rests on another state’s laws that conflict with California’s protections.8California Legislative Information. California Code HSC 123466
How Violations Are Enforced
AB 2223 added Section 123469, which lets anyone whose rights under the Reproductive Privacy Act are violated by a government actor file a civil suit in state superior court. The bill also authorizes those individuals to bring claims under the Tom Bane Civil Rights Act, California Civil Code Section 52.1.2California Legislative Information. California Assembly Bill 2223 – Reproductive Health
The Bane Act is what gives the protections real bite. A person whose rights are violated can recover actual damages, and a prevailing plaintiff is entitled to reasonable attorney’s fees. When the Attorney General, a district attorney, or a city attorney brings the action, a court can also impose a civil penalty of $25,000 per violation, awarded to each person whose rights were violated.9California Legislative Information. California Code CIV 52.1
A sheriff who arrests someone over a miscarriage, or a prosecutor who opens an investigation into a stillbirth, is exposed personally and professionally. The combination of actual damages, attorney’s fees, and a possible government-initiated $25,000 penalty creates a meaningful deterrent.
How AB 2223 Fits With Proposition 1 and SB 345
California voters approved Proposition 1 in November 2022, adding explicit reproductive freedom protections to the state constitution. Proposition 1 provides that the state cannot deny or interfere with a person’s right to choose whether to have an abortion or use contraceptives. Because California courts already recognized these rights, the Legislative Analyst’s Office concluded the proposition would have no direct fiscal effect but could act as a backstop if future challenges attempt to narrow statutory protections.10Legislative Analyst’s Office. Proposition 1 – Legislative Analysts Office
Senate Bill 345 addresses out-of-state enforcement. Any out-of-state subpoena, warrant, or legal process must include a sworn statement that the request is not connected to a legally protected healthcare activity, and California courts and clerks cannot issue a subpoena under another state’s law without that attestation. A California magistrate cannot issue an arrest warrant for someone whose alleged offense involves performing, receiving, or supporting reproductive healthcare that is lawful in California. Judges cannot compel witnesses when the underlying prosecution rests on another state’s restrictions on care California allows, and state and local employees are prohibited from cooperating with out-of-state efforts to enforce such restrictions.11California Legislative Information. SB 345 – Reproductive Health
The three pieces work on different levels. Proposition 1 keeps a future legislature from repealing reproductive rights by statute. AB 2223 sets the operational rules inside California: who is immune, what coroners can and cannot do, and how violations are enforced. SB 345 blocks the state’s legal system from being used by other states against people who came to California for lawful care.
What AB 2223 Does Not Reach: Digital Data
One area the law does not touch is digital health data stored outside the traditional medical system. Period-tracking apps, fertility monitors, and wellness platforms collect detailed reproductive information, but because these companies are generally not healthcare providers, health plans, or clearinghouses, they fall outside HIPAA’s privacy requirements. Data stored in those apps can be subpoenaed, sold, or shared without the safeguards that apply to a doctor’s records.
A federal attempt to close part of this gap has already failed. In 2024, HHS issued a rule prohibiting HIPAA-covered entities from disclosing reproductive health information for investigations into lawful care. A federal district court in Texas vacated the rule in June 2025, finding HHS had exceeded its statutory authority.12Maynard Nexsen. 2024 HIPAA Reproductive Health Privacy Rule Vacated
So AB 2223 prevents California from prosecuting or suing you over a pregnancy outcome, and SB 345 blocks out-of-state legal process through California’s courts. Neither law stops a third-party app from handing over cycle data to someone who asks. If digital privacy matters to you, look at what data you share with non-medical apps and whether their privacy policies actually limit disclosure to law enforcement.