California Shock: Offenders Can Still Run

A California Senate committee just killed a bill that would have banned registered sex offenders from running for public office — and right now, there is no law in the state stopping them.

Story Snapshot

California’s Assembly Bill 2753 passed the full Assembly 60-0 but died in a Senate committee on a 2-1-2 vote on June 30, 2026.
State Senator Scott Wiener cast the lone “no” vote, saying the bill swept too broadly across all three tiers of California’s sex offender registry.
The bill was sparked by a Fresno City Council race in which a registered sex offender, Renee Campos, was legally allowed to run.
No California law currently bans any registered sex offender from seeking local or state public office.

A Fresno Race Exposed a Legal Gap

The bill’s author, Assemblywoman Esmeralda Soria, introduced Assembly Bill 2753 after Fresno resident Renee Campos — a registered sex offender — ran for a Fresno City Council seat. Soria said the campaign shocked her community. She vowed to act. “I made a promise to my community that I would do everything in my power to ensure they would never have to go through something like this again,” Soria said. The bill passed the full Assembly with a unanimous 60-0 vote in May 2026.

Despite that lopsided Assembly vote, the bill ran into a wall in the Senate Elections and Constitutional Amendments Committee. The final tally was 2-1-2 — two in favor, one against, and two abstentions. That single “no” vote was enough to kill it. Under California Senate rules, a bill that fails to get enough “yes” votes in committee does not move forward, no matter how many members support it elsewhere.

Why One Senator Blocked the Vote

Senator Scott Wiener of San Francisco cast the deciding “no” vote. He said the bill was too broad. California uses a three-tier registry system. Tier 3 includes the most serious, high-risk offenders. Tiers 1 and 2 cover a wider range of offenses. Wiener argued that some people on the lower tiers committed offenses that not everyone would consider disqualifying for public office. He asked Soria to narrow the bill to cover only Tier 3 offenders. She refused.

Wiener also pointed to a second bill moving through the same committee — Assembly Bill 2691, authored by Assemblywoman Dawn Addis — which would bar candidates convicted of specific felony sexual assault or human trafficking crimes. He supported that narrower approach. Critics, however, noted that a version of that second bill was amended to exclude felony child sex crimes, meaning people convicted of those offenses could still run for office under its language. Greg Burt of the California Family Council testified that the amended version “protects child victims least.”

No Law, No Ban — What Happens Next

With Assembly Bill 2753 dead, California still has no statute barring any registered sex offender from seeking public office at any level. That includes school boards, city councils, and state legislative seats. Soria’s bill would have changed that across the board. Wiener’s position was that a narrower, offense-based rule would be more likely to survive a court challenge. Broad candidacy bans have faced constitutional scrutiny in other states, where courts have weighed them against due process and equal protection rights.

California Rejects Ban on Sex Offenders Running for Office After Fresno Candidate’s BidCopy:In early 2026, Fresno resident Rene Campos, a registered sex offender convicted of possessing child sex abuse material, announced his run for City Council. Though he failed to qualify for…

— Iníon Dé (@inion_De_1893) July 3, 2026

Advocacy groups reacted with outrage. Carl DeMaio of Reform California called the Senate’s decision “insane” and “grotesque.” His group said it would work to elect candidates who support a full ban. For many Californians — left and right — the outcome is hard to explain. A bill that passed 60-0 in the Assembly, with support from both parties, was stopped by a single vote in a five-member committee. Whether the concern is protecting children or protecting constitutional rights, most voters are likely asking the same question: why is this so hard to get done?