Look, I want to walk you through what's happening with California's CARE Court program, because it affects how our state is approaching mental health and the broader conversation around public safety that impacts our communities.
Governor Newsom just signed a couple of bills meant to strengthen the CARE Court system, which he launched back in 2023 to help get seriously mentally ill people off the streets and into treatment. The program lets family members, police, firefighters, and mental health professionals refer people experiencing psychosis to a judge who then sets up a treatment plan through the county. According to CalMatters, the program has been underperforming since it started, so legislators keep trying to improve it. The two bills Newsom signed make it easier for first responders to refer people into CARE Court, and they allow families to share information about their loved ones with the treatment team, even if they can't receive information back without that person's consent.
But here's where it gets more complicated. There were two other bills that would have made much bigger changes to the program, and they died in committee before reaching Newsom's desk. Those bills would have focused on preventing people from dropping out of treatment if they're too sick to consent to care on their own. They died in August in the Assembly Appropriations Committee, partly because of the price tag and partly because of significant opposition from disability rights groups who worry that expanding CARE Court's reach would make it more coercive.
The disagreement here comes down to philosophy. Some families of people with severe mental illness are frustrated because their loved ones are stuck on the streets because they're too sick to consent to treatment. But critics, including public defenders and disability advocates, argue that voluntary participation is what makes CARE Court actually work. According to CalMatters, through June 2025, the program had filed over 2,200 petitions but only resulted in about 517 agreements or plans, with another 984 dismissed.
One of the bills that Newsom signed was also watered down before getting to his desk. The original version would have given families more involvement and communication in the treatment process, but after privacy concerns were raised, it was changed to allow only one-way communication. Families can now submit information to the treatment team about their loved one's location, condition, or anything else that might help, but they can't receive information back without that person's consent.
What I'm seeing locally in the East Bay and across the Bay Area is that this whole CARE Court conversation reflects a real tension we're grappling with. We want to help people who are suffering and living on our streets, and families are desperate for solutions. But there's legitimate concern about whether expanding coercive treatment is the right answer, and our legislators are trying to find that middle ground. It's a tough balance, and clearly Sacramento isn't ready to move as aggressively on this as some advocates want.
