Newsom’s Empty Comparison: The Real Difference Between California and Texas Shoplifting Laws

Gov. Gavin Newsom continues to gaslight voters about Proposition 36, the ballot measure that would strengthen California’s shoplifting laws. In his tone-deaf defense of the state’s lenient laws, the governor has repeatedly argued that California is tougher on shoplifting than Texas. In reality, the difference between the two states tells another story.  

Prop 36 seeks to reverse the damage caused by Proposition 47, which weakened laws against shoplifting and fueled a surge in theft across the state. Prop 47 was passed a decade ago by voters after being deceptively titled the “Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act” under the watchful eye of former Attorney General Kamala Harris. In fact, the law reduced shoplifting to a misdemeanor if the value of the stolen goods is under $950, with a maximum sentence of six months in jail or a $1,000 fine. 

As a result, criminals strategically keep their stolen loot below this legal threshold. Further, California treats each shoplifting incident as a separate misdemeanor no matter how often it’s repeated — even if they occur at the same store or on the same day —  as long as each incident is under $950. 

Even thefts over $950 in a single incident are not automatically treated as a felony. It is defined in the law as a “wobbler,” meaning it could be charged as a felony at the prosecutor’s discretion. In too many cases, offenders get off with a slap on the wrist like probation or community service.

Contrast this with Texas, where shoplifting is a Class A misdemeanor when the value of the property stolen is $750 or more but less than $2,500. Class A misdemeanors are punishable by a fine of up to $4,000 and 180 days in jail for a first offense. Repeat offenses raise the bar for punishment. A third conviction can be charged as a “state jail felony” regardless of the amount stolen during any of the incidents.

But Texas doesn’t stop there. Under the “Texas Theft Liability Act,” retailers or individuals can also sue shoplifters for civil damages. If the thief is a minor, parents can be held liable for up to $5,000 in damages in addition to any court-imposed fines. 

So contrary to Newsom’s misleading rhetoric, California’s approach to shoplifting is not tougher than Texas law — far from it. While the initial threshold is higher in Texas for a felony, the Lone Star State’s laws are much harsher when it comes to repeat offenses and civil liabilities. And, when parents are financially accountable for their children’s crimes, youth shoplifting tends to drop dramatically.

Californians are confronted with the consequences of their state’s lax laws every day. Everywhere we go, we face aisle after aisle of locked merchandise. Insurance rates and the cost of goods have both spiked due to out-of-control theft. Many stores have chosen to close their doors and leave communities where the law — and lenient prosecutors — enable repeat offenders to act with impunity.

Proposition 36 offers a path for California voters to fix this. By passing Prop 36, voters can restore accountability, making a third conviction for theft — even if it’s under $950 — a felony, punishable by up to three years in state prison. It also adds enhancements for theft or destruction to store property that causes tens of thousands of dollars in damages, regardless if thieves ultimately steal merchandise valued at far less.

Gov. Newsom’s attempt to distract voters by comparing California’s laws to Texas won’t persuade the millions of Californians who are living with the consequences of Prop 47 each day. Voters can seize this chance to restore meaningful consequences for shoplifters should they approve Prop 36 at the ballot box.

Thunder Parley is an engineer and concerned citizen of San Jose, CA who wants a safer and more affordable California for our children, elderly, veterans and all of the Golden State’s hard-working residents and business owners.