The bills would limit cooperation between local law enforcement and federal immigration authorities, ban the use of lead bullets by hunters and allow prosecutors to file misdemeanor charges rather than felonies for simple possession of heroin and cocaine.

The most hotly debated immigration measure is known as the Trust Act. It would restrict local law enforcement from detaining for possible deportation anyone arrested on minor offenses.

The bill would significantly curb California’s involvement in a federal immigration program called Secure Communities, which requires local law enforcement to share with immigration officials the fingerprints of all people arrested. Immigration officials often request that an individual suspected of being in the country illegally be held for transfer to federal custody.

The program has been highly controversial, particularly in California, with its large immigrant population, and participation in the program has already been scaled back.

Los Angeles Police Chief Charlie Beck announced last year that his department would not hand to federal authorities people arrested for low-level crimes. State Atty. Gen. Kamala Harris subsequently told law enforcement agencies throughout the state that complying with Secure Communities was optional.

Critics of Secure Communities say that it has led to unfair deportations of people who were in the country illegally but were stopped by police on suspicion of minor offenses such as street vending or traffic violations.

Assemblyman V. Manuel Perez (D-Coachella), a supporter of the Trust Act, said during a floor debate Tuesday that the bill would “advance the goals of protecting families and communities, restoring trust in law enforcement and focusing public resources on threats to public safety.”

Assemblyman Brian Jones (R-Santee) voted No on the bill, AB 4, by Sen. Tom Ammiano (D-San Francisco). Jones said it showed lawmakers “finding ways and excuses to go soft on crime.”

Another measure headed for Brown would make it illegal to report workers’ immigration status in retaliation against an employee who files a complaint about unsafe working conditions or sexual harassment. The proposal, SB 666, came from Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento).

Lawmakers also signed off on the first major batch of gun control measures to be considered this year.

One proposal would bar hunters from using lead ammunition, which backers of the ban say is toxic and a threat to wildlife that might ingest it. That includes endangered condors, among California’s protected species.

Assemblyman Marc Levine (D-San Rafael) said the evidence is clear that the bullets are poison: “It just makes sense to protect our environment.”

An opponent of the measure, Assemblyman Brian Dahle (R-Bieber), protested that the bill would amount to a “de facto ban of hunting in our state.”

“Hunting is a tradition in California,” Dahle said, arguing that there is no evidence the lead in bullets causes environmental harm. “In some parts of the state, hunting is vital to the local economy.”

Assemblyman Anthony Rendon (D-Lakewood) authored the bill, AB 711.

Other gun proposals were drafted in response to the mass slaying of children and adults at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut.

Lawmakers approved a measure that would extend from six months to five years a ban on gun possession by people who have made a serious threat of violence to a psychotherapist.

“Threats and guns are a lethal combination,” said Assemblywoman Nancy Skinner (D-Berkeley), author of AB 1131.

Another measure would crack down on “straw purchasers” of firearms — those who buy weapons and sell them to people who are not eligible to possess them, and tell investigators the weapons were lost or stolen.