Labor Code section 432.7 prohibits most California employers from asking applicants about, or relying on, convictions that have been judicially dismissed or sealed to make hiring decisions. Section 432.7 also contains a list of exemptions for employers that are required by law to run background checks or restrict hiring based on criminal history. A recent case clarifies that employers falling within one of those section 432.7 exemptions are still subject to the general rule unless a specific law permits the employer to consider the criminal history.
On September 22, 2026, the Court of Appeal (Second District, Division Eight) published its decision in A.S. v. Los Angeles Unified School District, affirming summary judgment against the school district. While the school district is legally obligated to fingerprint applicants and to bar employment of people with certain convictions from working around children, the Court ruled against the school district because it used expunged misdemeanors to reject two applicants without specific statutory authority to do so.
The Facts
Two applicants sought jobs with the Los Angeles Unified School District (the District), one as a part-time after-school program worker and the other as a legal secretary in the general counsel’s office. The District ran background checks for both applicants. Each had a single misdemeanor conviction, one for battery and one for grand theft, and each had obtained a dismissal under Penal Code section 1203.4, the process commonly (if imprecisely) called “expungement.”
The District rejected both applicants on the grounds that the Education Code requires it to conduct criminal background checks and to restrict employment based on criminal history. The District argued that because it has a duty to protect children, it can screen out applicants with nearly any conviction, expunged or not. Two different trial judges disagreed and granted summary judgment in favor of the applicants. The District appealed, the cases were consolidated, and the Court of Appeal affirmed summary judgment for the applicants.
The General Rule Is Broad While Exemptions are Narrow
The Court began its analysis by noting that Labor Code section 432.7 prohibits public and private employers from asking an applicant to disclose a judicially dismissed or sealed conviction, and from utilizing such a conviction as a factor in any employment decision (what the court calls the “Basic Prohibition”). The Court acknowledged that the District is an employer required by law to run background checks and is required by law to refuse to hire people with certain convictions. However, the Court rejected the District’s argument that the Education Code – which prohibits the District from hiring persons with expunged convictions for violent or serious felonies, sex offenses, and controlled-substance offenses – allowed the District to reject these applicants with offenses that were not expressly prohibited by the Education. Because the District could not point to any law requiring it to obtain information about, or restrict employment for those particular convictions, the exemptions did not reach the District’s conduct, and the Basic Prohibition governed.
The court put it plainly: being required to run a background check does not entitle an employer to use everything the check reveals to reject employment. The exemption authorizes the check, then the employer is limited to complying with only those hiring restrictions the law specifically imposes. The Court found that legislative history indicated that the Legislature intended broad application of the Basic Prohibition, and narrow application of the exceptions.
Takeaways For Employers
A.S. v. LAUSD is a public-sector case, but the statute applies to every California employer, and the lesson applies beyond school districts:
- An exemption is not a license. The Basic Prohibition still applies to employers that fall within a section 432.7 exemption. The employer may only act upon criminal history that is expressly defined as actionable in a separate statute or law.
- Match the conviction to the law, every time. Before relying on an exemption to ask about or act on a dismissed or sealed conviction, identify the specific federal, state, or local law that permits the employer to do so.
- Audit your screening criteria now. Ensure that any background-check policies and vendor instructions treat expunged or sealed convictions as disqualifying only where they correspond to a specific legal requirement.
- Keep Related Background Check Rules In Mind. In addition to Labor Code section 432.7, ensure that background check policies and vendor instructions also comply with the Fair Chance Act (Government Code section 12952), the FCRA, California’s ICRAA, and any applicable local fair chance ordinances. Each has its own rules about timing, individualized assessment, and notice. Compliance with one of these laws does not necessarily ensure compliance with the others.
Employers relying on statutory exemptions to screen criminal history should treat this decision as a prompt to closely review and analyze the text of the exemption and of the underlying law that triggers it. If you would like help reviewing your background-check program, please contact the author or your favorite CDF attorney.
