At a news conference at his Bedminster, New Jersey, golf club, former President Donald Trump blamed Vice President and Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris for a 2014 California law he falsely said allowed shoplifters to steal from retailers without consequence.
“You’re allowed to rob a store as long as it’s not more than $950. Has everyone ever heard of that?” Trump said Aug. 15. “You can rob a store, and you have these thieves going into stores with calculators, calculating how much it is, because if it’s less than $950 they can rob it and not get charged. That was her that did that.”
Trump was referring to Proposition 47, a 2014 California voter-approved law, “which makes the theft of stolen property worth less than $950 a misdemeanor charge rather than a felony,” Karoline Leavitt, a Trump campaign spokesperson said, linking to a June 12 San Francisco Chronicle article about the law and a new ballot initiative that could roll back some of its provisions.
That article mentions neither that Harris was involved in creating the law, nor that thefts of less than $950 bring no charges. The article also noted that other states, including Republican-led Texas at $2,500, have higher financial thresholds to meet felony charges for theft.
California’s law did reduce some nonviolent crimes from felonies to misdemeanors and did include a $950 felony threshold on retail thefts.
But Trump’s comments mislead about the law and Harris’ role in its creation.
What is Proposition 47?
Proposition 47 was a ballot initiative created in response to a court ruling that ordered California to reduce its prison population because of overcrowding.
Then-San Francisco District Attorney George Gascón and former San Diego Police Chief William Lansdowne co-authored the bill, with collaboration from nonprofits such as Stanford’s Justice Advocacy Project and Californians for Safety and Justice, said UC Law San Francisco professor Hadar Aviram.
Proposition 47 downgraded some nonviolent drug and property crimes to misdemeanors. A summary Harris’ office prepared in 2014, said the law “requires misdemeanor sentence instead of felony for the following crimes when amount involved is $950 or less: petty theft, receiving stolen property, and forging/writing bad checks.”
Under state law before Proposition 47, shoplifting property worth $950 or less was often a misdemeanor, but such crimes could, in some cases, also be charged as a burglary, which could be a felony, Harris’ summary said. Proposition 47 said shoplifting property under that threshold would always be considered a misdemeanor.
The proposition defined “shoplifting,” a misdemeanor, in the state’s penal code as “entering a commercial establishment with the intent to commit larceny while that establishment is open during regular business hours” and the value of property taken is $950 or less. Entering a retail store with the intent to steal when a store is not open is burglary, which could be a felony.
The $950 threshold in Proposition 47, however, was not new to state law.
The California Legislature in 2010 passed Assembly Bill 2372, which set a $950 threshold between petty theft (a misdemeanor) and grand larceny (a felony), raising it to account for inflation from $400, a threshold set in 1982. Then-Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed that change into law.
Proposition 47 essentially affirmed that threshold and addressed a few more theft categories, such as auto thefts and thefts of some agricultural products, that the 2010 legislation didn’t address, experts told PolitiFact.
Proposition 47 passed with 59% of voters supporting the ballot measure. Harris, in the same election, was reelected as attorney general.
The law has been controversial, with critics blaming it for increasing retail crime. Voters in November will consider Proposition 36, which would mandate drug treatment and allow for felony sentences for certain drug and theft crimes. It would leave the $950 threshold intact, but allow felony charges for people with two or more previous theft convictions.
California’s $950 threshold for a theft felony is lower than in 39 states, plus the District of Columbia, a list provided by the National Conference of State Legislatures shows.
Does Proposition 47 let people steal without being charged?
No, theft of any amount is still a crime in California, Aviram said.
“Theft of less than $950 is a misdemeanor, theft of $950 or more is grand theft, which is a felony,” Aviram said. “Both are criminal offenses, and both are prosecutable and punishable.”
People convicted of misdemeanor shoplifting still face penalties of up to six months in jail and/or fines of up to $1,000. People with prior theft convictions or registered sex offenders could face more severe penalties under the state’s penal code.
Will Matthews, a spokesperson for Californians for Safety and Justice, an advocacy group that co-authored Proposition 47, called Trump’s comments about the law “patently absurd.”
“Crime is still crime in California,” Matthews said. “Misdemeanors in California are still punishable” with jail time.
Matthews said the underlying idea of Proposition 47 was to make people committing low-level crimes eligible for local jail sentences instead of state prison, which would save taxpayers money.
What was Harris’ involvement?
Harris wasn’t involved in creating or passing Proposition 47. As attorney general, she wrote only the proposal’s title and language about it on the state ballot.
Harris’ campaign did not return a request for comment, but Matthews said she was not involved in the law’s creation, and multiple news outlets have reported that Harris remained publicly neutral on the bill.
“She played really no role in Proposition 47 at all,” Matthews said. “She was the attorney general of the state of California at the time that Proposition 47 was on the ballot, and as the attorney general, when it comes to ballot initiatives like that, her responsibility is to be neutral.”
Harris, as part of her duties, was responsible for verifying that the proposal met the number of signatures required to be added to the state ballot. But “she didn’t endorse or oppose Proposition 47 when it was on the ballot,” Matthews said.
Stanford University Law Professor Robert Weisberg, co-director of its Criminal Justice Center, said Harris was “resolutely neutral” on Proposition 47, as “she was on almost all major reform initiatives” while she was attorney general.
“She had a kind of ministerial role in editing the language of the proposition to make it comply with state constitutional law,” Weisberg said.
That is typically how ballot initiatives in California work, Aviram said.
“Voter initiatives in California are authored by lobbying groups and nonprofits. They are submitted to the Attorney General’s office for official title and summary, but the responsibility for their crafting ultimately lies with whoever proposes them and collects enough signatures to put them on the ballot,” Aviram said in an email.
Some Republicans opposed to the law criticized Harris, saying she misrepresented the bill in a summary her office wrote. One California assemblymember said she misled voters by titling the bill the “Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act,” but that was the title the bill’s authors had proposed. Harris had titled it, “Criminal Sentences. Misdemeanor Penalties. Initiative Statute,” which was the version printed on the ballot.
Our ruling
Trump said Harris was responsible for a California law that lets people steal with no penalties as long as the goods are valued at $950 or less.
He’s wrong on two counts. There is a $950 threshold cited in Proposition 47 between a misdemeanor or felony theft charge in the state. A 2010 law a Republican governor signed set that threshold. Proposition 47 reaffirmed that threshold. The law doesn’t say there are no penalties for stealing under that amount: Misdemeanor theft carries penalties of up to six months in jail and a fine.
Harris was California’s attorney general when voters approved the 2014 law. A spokesperson for a group that co-authored Proposition 47 said Harris had no involvement in crafting the bill. Experts and news reports show Harris remained publicly neutral on the initiative.
A Trump spokesperson provided no evidence that Harris was responsible for drafting the law, or that people can steal without consequences. We rate the claim False.
