AB 2563
CFC OpposesSex discrimination: scope
CFC Says
CFC opposes AB 2563.
This bill expands California's anti-discrimination laws to include gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, reproductive health decisions, and intersex status across a wide range of state laws. It could affect areas such as bathrooms, sports teams, and workplace speech rules around how people are addressed.
Currently at 2nd Committee, having cleared 3 stages. Hearing in Senate Appropriations Committee today.
Legislative Progress
CFC's Position Letter
April 2, 2026
The Honorable Blanca Pacheco
California State Assembly, District 64
Sacramento, CA 95814
Dear Assembly Member Pacheco:
On behalf of tens of thousands of constituents, allied organizations, and more than 2,000 churches across California, California Family Council strongly opposes AB 2563.
AB 2563 rewrites the legal definition of "sex discrimination" across virtually every California civil rights statute simultaneously. The new definition adds gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, intersex status, reproductive health decisions, and "degree of conformity to sex or gender stereotypes." That final phrase means any policy treating a biological male as male could constitute unlawful discrimination if that person self-identifies otherwise.
This sweeping redefinition applies to both the Unruh Civil Rights Act and FEHA, covering businesses, public accommodations, employers, housing providers, and schools. In practice, it provides legal teeth to compel biological males' access to women's restrooms and sports teams, and creates civil liability for anyone who declines to use preferred pronouns. Unruh violations carry $4,000 in statutory damages per offense plus attorney fees; FEHA complaints may yield compensatory damages and injunctive relief.
Concerns for Families, Women, and Faith Communities
The bill contains no carve-out for female-only spaces, meaning women's shelters, locker rooms, and girls' sports programs face discrimination liability for enforcing biological sex distinctions. School staff who defer to parents on gender identity questions could face civil exposure, undermining parental authority over their children's formation.
We are particularly concerned that religious schools, churches, and faith-based nonprofits are not explicitly exempt from this bill's expanded definitions. Because no religious exemption language appears in AB 2563, these institutions face real uncertainty and potential litigation risk simply for operating according to their beliefs about biological sex. As CFC has documented, this incremental legal pressure on faith communities follows a troubling pattern in California policy.1 Alliance Defending Freedom has similarly documented the erosion of parental and religious conscience protections under California's expanding SOGI framework.2 A local preview of this logic appeared in San Diego County's 2022 proposal to redefine "women and girls" to include men and boys.3
Conclusion
AB 2563 does not close a gap in California law. It permanently encodes gender ideology into the foundational layer of civil rights statutes, with no limiting principle and no conscience protection for those who recognize biological reality. For these reasons, California Family Council respectfully opposes AB 2563 and urges a no vote.
Respectfully,
Greg Burt
Vice President, California Family Council
References
1 Amy Haywood, "New California Curriculum Seeks to Transform How Children View Gender and Their Sexual Identity," California Family Council, November 30, 2017. https://www.californiafamily.org/2017/11/new-california-curriculum-seeks-to-transform-how-children-view-gender-and-their-sexual-idenity/
2 Alliance Defending Freedom, "ACLU and CA Dep. of Education Mislead Parents on Opt-Out Rights for Gender and Sexual Orientation Lessons," California Family Council, December 10, 2019. https://www.californiafamily.org/2019/12/aclu-ca-dep-of-education-mislead-parents-on-opt-out-rights/
3 California Family Council, "San Diego Board of Supervisors to Vote on Ordinance that Redefines 'Women and Girls' to Include Men and Boys," California Family Council, April 25, 2022. https://www.californiafamily.org/2022/04/san-diego-board-of-supervisors-to-vote-on-ordinance-that-redefines-women-and-girls-to-include-men-and-boys/
Official Description
(1)The United States and California Constitutions guarantee all persons the right to equal protection of the laws. The California Constitution further recognizes the right of all persons to pursue and obtain safety, happiness, and privacy, guarantees an individual’s reproductive freedom in their most intimate decisions, and prohibits disqualification of a person from entering or pursuing a business, profession, vocation, or employment because of, among other things, sex. This bill would require, under all state laws, that any provision that prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex, discrimination on the basis of gender, or similar discrimination be interpreted to prohibit sex discrimination. The bill would define “sex discrimination” to include, among other things, discrimination based on any of specified actual or perceived characteristics or actions, including based on degree of conformity to sex or gender stereotypes. This bill would provide that this interpretation reflects the existing protections of specified state constitutional laws, as described above. The bill would require these provisions to be liberally construed to effectuate the purposes of these constitutional protections. The bill would make related findings and declarations. (2)Existing law, the Unruh Civil Rights Act (act), provides that all persons within the jurisdiction of this state are entitled to full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, or services in all business establishments regardless of their sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability status, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sexual orientation, citizenship, primary language, or immigration status. That act defines “sex” to include, among other things, pregnancy, childbirth, or medical conditions related to pregnancy or childbirth. This bill would further define, for purposes of the act, “sex” to include any characteristics set forth under the above-described definition of “sex discrimination.” (3)Existing law, the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), makes certain discriminatory employment and housing practices unlawful, and authorizes a person claiming to be aggrieved by an alleged unlawful practice to file a verified complaint with the Civil Rights Department. The FEHA defines various terms in connection with unlawful practices, including the term “sex.” This bill would further define “sex” to include any characteristics set forth under the above-described definition of “sex discrimination.”