California Gov. Gavin Newsom has signed legislation that significantly modifies the state's mental health diversion program, often referred to as the “Epstein loophole.” The changes aim to give judges greater discretion in determining whether individuals accused of serious crimes should be placed in diversion programs instead of facing jail time.
The law, which went into effect in 2018, originally required judges to grant diversion to eligible defendants if a qualifying mental illness contributed to the crime and the individual was not considered a significant risk to public safety. Those accepted into the program could avoid incarceration by completing court-approved mental health treatment.
Under the new legislation, diversion is no longer presumed. Judges now have the authority to deny diversion if they believe placing an individual in community-based treatment could endanger public safety, including increasing the likelihood of physical injury or serious harm to others.
"California believes treatment and accountability go hand in hand," Newsom stated. "We are proud to preserve mental health diversion for people who can benefit from it while ensuring judges have the discretion they need to protect victims, safeguard communities, and make decisions based on the full picture before them."
The bill received broad bipartisan support, with lawmakers arguing that the previous law removed judicial discretion. Assemblymember Stephanie Nguyen, the bill's author, stated that judges were sometimes forced to grant diversion even when they felt it was inappropriate, which she described as "not justice."
The push for legislative changes intensified following several high-profile cases that drew public outrage. One such case involved former Kern County Supervisor Zack Scrivner, who faced felony child abuse and possession of assault weapons charges in early 2025. Prosecutors alleged Scrivner touched a child inappropriately while under the influence of drugs, though he was not charged with child sexual assault. The case, and his son's public denouncement of the diversion law, amplified criticism that the program was being exploited by dangerous offenders.
State Sen. Shannon Grove introduced Senate Bill 1373, which aimed to exclude individuals accused of certain violent crimes from mental health diversion eligibility. Supporters of the overhaul argued it was necessary to restore judicial authority and prevent the exploitation of the diversion system. They asserted that the changes would not eliminate mental health diversion but would ensure judges could deny it when public safety was a concern.
However, some opponents, including the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, expressed concern that the changes could limit access to treatment for individuals whose criminal behavior stemmed from mental illness. Critics also argued that a few prominent cases were being used to justify restricting a program that had successfully helped many individuals avoid jail while receiving necessary treatment. They further contended that diversion programs play a role in addressing the disproportionate incarceration rates among people of color, as convictions can create long-term barriers to housing, education, and employment.