California Sex Offender Office Ban Fails

July 3, 2026

California’s latest sex-crimes fight ends with lawmakers leaving a door open for registered child sex offenders to run for public office, while victims and voters are told to just trust the system.

Story Snapshot

A Fresno case where a man convicted of child sex abuse material tried to run for city council sparked Assembly Bill 2753 to ban all registered sex offenders from holding office.
California law still does not stop registered sex offenders from running for city council, school board, or even the state legislature if they meet basic qualifications.
The bill passed one Assembly committee but died in a near-tie Senate panel after the author refused to narrow it only to the most serious Tier 3 offenders.
Senators advanced a softer bill instead, one that still allows even some felony child sex criminals to run for office, fueling anger on both the right and the left.

How a Fresno council race sparked a statewide fight

In early 2023, Fresno residents learned that Rene Campos, a man convicted in 2018 for possessing child sex abuse material, was trying to run for their city council. Many locals were shocked to find out that nothing in California law stopped a registered sex offender from appearing on the ballot as long as he met age, residency, and other basic rules. Campos never made the ballot because he failed to collect enough valid signatures, but the idea that he could even try pushed anger in Fresno to a boiling point.

Assemblywoman Esmeralda Soria, a Democrat from Merced whose district includes parts of the Fresno area, said she promised her community she would act so this kind of candidacy never happened again. She introduced Assembly Bill 2753 to ban anyone required to register as a sex offender from running for or holding any local or state public office in California. Her plan covered all three tiers of the state’s registry, from less serious offenses to the most violent crimes, and aimed to close what many saw as a glaring loophole in public safety.

What AB 2753 would have changed in California law

Under today’s rules, a person can be on the sex offender registry and still run for city council, school board, county office, or even the state legislature, as long as they meet general legal requirements. AB 2753 would have added one clear new line: if you are required to register as a sex offender under Penal Code section 290, you cannot run for or serve in any public office. That blanket rule would have applied to Tier 1 offenders, Tier 2 offenders, and Tier 3 lifetime registrants, regardless of whether their crimes involved adults or children.

California’s tiered system, created by Senate Bill 384 in 2017, shows just how wide that net is. Tier 1, the lowest level, covers tens of thousands of people, including some convicted of indecent exposure or misdemeanor sexual battery. Tier 2 includes more serious crimes like certain sexual acts with minors, while Tier 3 is reserved for the worst offenses, such as rape and sex crimes against very young children, with lifetime registration and no easy path off the list. By tying political rights to registration alone, AB 2753 treated all of those categories the same.

Why state senators killed the bill

AB 2753 cleared the Assembly Elections Committee, signaling that lawmakers in that chamber were willing to at least start with a strict ban on registered sex offenders in public office. The real clash came later in the Senate Elections and Constitutional Amendments Committee, led by Democratic Senator Scott Wiener. Wiener and others said they were only willing to support the bill if it applied to the most serious Tier 3 offenders, not to lower-tier cases that could include “Romeo and Juliet” type relationships between young people close in age.

Soria rejected that change, arguing that limiting the ban to Tier 3 offenders would not fully protect communities from the risk of putting any registered sex offender in charge of budgets, schools, or police oversight. With no compromise, the committee deadlocked in a near-tie vote, and the bill failed to advance, leaving the current legal gap in place. Fresno’s council president and other local officials had traveled to Sacramento to support the bill, but their testimony was not enough to overcome concerns about overreach and constitutional rights.

What passed instead – and why people are angry

While AB 2753 died, senators moved forward another bill written by Assembly Member Don Addis, pitched as a narrower fix with extra protections for young people in consensual relationships. That softer bill was changed in committee so that even people convicted of some felony child sex crimes, including rape, can still run for public office, as long as they meet other legal requirements. For many citizens on both the right and the left, that outcome looked upside down: the “compromise” protected political rights for convicted predators, not the safety of families.

AB 2753, Assemblywoman Esmeralda Soria’s bill aimed at preventing registered sex offenders from running for local or state public office in California, failed to advance Tuesday in the Senate Elections Committee.#AB2753 #CaliforniaPolitics #MercedCounty pic.twitter.com/0tg46Voosz

— Los Banos Enterprise (@LosBanosCaNews) June 30, 2026

Campos himself accused lawmakers of using Soria’s bill as a “political weapon” aimed at him, feeding a deeper mistrust that the fight was more about image than safety. At the same time, national and state patterns show a growing divide, where tough-on-crime bills involving child sex offenses often stall on details while spin wars rage on social media. Californians who already believe the system bends over backward for elites and special interests see one more sign that, when push comes to shove, the political class protects its own chances to hold power first.