The 2015-16 Budget: Major Features of the Adopted Plan (Other Issues)

Jun 19, 2015 - Proposition  1E requires all funds to be appropriated by July  1, 2016. The budget act and Chapter  1 fully appropriate the remaining funds available from Proposition  1E. Under these bills, the department will have five years to commit Proposition  1E funds and three additional years to spend the funds, after which time the authorization to use the funds will expire.
https://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/3278

The 2026-27 Budget: California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation

Feb 23, 2026 - As mentioned in the “Establishment of the Second California Prison Receivership ” section of this brief, CDCR is under federal court order in the Coleman  v.  Newsom case to reduce mental health vacancies.
https://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/5137

The 2026-27 Budget: Department of Justice

Feb 11, 2026 - Supreme Court issued a decision in the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen case that found laws requiring people provide “good cause ” to carry a concealed weapon to be unconstitutional.
https://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/5118

Overview and Update on the Prison Receivership

Nov 8, 2023 - Federal Court Orders State to Reduce Prison Overcrowding In November 2006, plaintiffs in the cases now known as Plata v. Newsom (involving prison medical care) and Coleman v. Newsom (involving prison mental health care) filed motions for the federal courts to convene a three ‑judge panel pursuant to the U.S.
https://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/4813

State Corrections: Response to COVID-19

May 8, 2020 - In 2009, a federal three-judge panel —convened at the request of the plaintiffs in Coleman v. Newsom and Plata v. Newsom —declared that overcrowding was the primary reason that CDCR was unable to provide adequate health care and ordered the state to reduce the population of its prisons.
https://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/4229

State Correctional Spending Increased Despite Significant Population Reductions

Feb 4, 2020 - In November 2006, plaintiffs in Coleman v. Newsom and Plata v. Newsom  filed motions for the federal courts to convene a three ‑judge panel pursuant to the U.S.  Prison Litigation Reform Act to determine whether ( 1)  p rison overcrowding was the primary cause of CDCR ’s inability to provide constitutionally adequate inmate health care and ( 2)  a prisoner release order was the only way to remedy these conditions.
https://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/4145

The 2025-26 California Spending Plan: Judiciary and Criminal Justice

Oct 24, 2025 - In addition, the budget package continues to include language —without a specific amount in the CDCR budget –that would allow the Department of Finance (DOF) to make payments from the General Fund for any fines related to staffing vacancies in the   Coleman v.
https://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/5085

The 2017-18 Budget: California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation

Mar 1, 2017 - Coleman v. Brown In 1995, a federal court ruled in the case now referred to as Coleman v. Brown that the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) was not providing constitutionally adequate mental health care to its inmates.
https://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/3595

The 2023-24 Budget: The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation

Feb 16, 2023 - This brief provides our analysis of the Governor’s 2023-24 budget proposals related to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.
https://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/4686

The 2017-18 Budget: Department of State Hospitals (DSH)

Feb 22, 2017 - Coleman v. Brown In 1995, a federal court ruled in the case now referred to as Coleman v. Brown that the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) was not providing constitutionally adequate mental health care to its inmates.
https://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/3578