I am an employer in California that holds regular meetings to share the company's views on political and religious topics, and I have read that on 30 ?

The situation

I am an employer in California that holds regular meetings to share the company's views on political and religious topics, and I have read that on 30 October 2026 the Ninth Circuit upheld an order blocking California's captive-audience meeting law, SB 399, which bars employers from disciplining workers who decline to attend such meetings. I understand the court held the law was content-based and speaker-based and failed strict scrutiny under the First Amendment. Can I now require attendance at these meetings, what remains of the law after this ruling, and what risks remain under other labour laws?

Detailed Analysis

Based strictly on the legal sections provided, there is no information regarding the Ninth Circuit's ruling on SB 399 or the legality of requiring employees to attend meetings regarding political or religious views. The provided laws focus on different areas of employment.

For example, one law requires that "Each employer shall post and keep posted, in conspicuous places on the premises of the employer where notices to employees and applicants for employment are customarily posted, a notice..."^[1]. This means you have specific duties regarding where you display certain legal notices to your staff. Another law discusses exemptions for religious groups, stating that certain civil rights protections do not apply to "a religious corporation, association, educational institution, or society with respect to the employment of individuals of a particular religion to perform work connected with the carrying on by such corporation, association, educational institution, or society of its activities"^[2]. This means if your company is a religious organization hiring people of a specific religion for religious work, certain rules might not apply to you.

However, these sections do not settle whether you can mandate attendance at political or religious meetings following the Ninth Circuit decision. The law regarding 'captive-audience' meetings—which refers to meetings where employees are required to listen to an employer's message—is not addressed in the provided text. Because the provided statutes do not cover the First Amendment or the specific California law you mentioned, I cannot provide a firm conclusion on your ability to discipline workers who skip these meetings.

State, provincial, or local laws may add further rules, so you should check California-specific labor codes and recent court filings.

Statutory Citations

Related Questions

• I employ workers in the United States whose employment authorisation documents are due for renewal, and some renewals were filed after 30 October 2025?
• My employer pays $7.25 an hour but California's minimum wage is higher, what can I do?
• How do paid leave policies affect my job and benefits in California?
• Can I file a complaint if I was passed over for a promotion at the Post Office because of my religion?