Source: losbanosenterprise.com 6/30/26
AB 2753 would have prohibited anyone ever required to register as a sex offender from running for local or state office in California.
Sacramento, CA (June 30, 2026) — A bill by Assemblywoman Esmeralda Soria that sought to prevent registered sex offenders from running for local or state public office in California failed to advance Tuesday in the Senate Elections and Constitutional Amendments Committee, according to Soria’s office.
AB 2753 would have amended California Elections Code Section 20 to prohibit a person from being a candidate for, or being elected to, any state or local elective office if the person has ever been required to register as a sex offender under Penal Code Section 290. Existing law already bars candidates convicted of certain felony public-corruption crimes, including bribery, embezzlement of public money, extortion or theft of public money, perjury, or conspiracy to commit those crimes.
Soria, D-Merced, said she was disappointed by the committee’s decision and said she was unwilling to accept additional amendments that she believed would weaken the bill.
…
A Senate committee analysis of the bill stated that current California law has no restriction on registered sex offenders running for or holding elected office.
…
The Senate analysis also outlined concerns raised about the bill’s broad language, including that it would permanently disqualify anyone who had ever been required to register, even if the person was later removed from the registry or if the underlying law changed. The analysis noted that…
Related article:
This legislative committee today made a wise decision by stopping AB 2753. If passed, that bill would have denied voters the opportunity to vote for individuals who are law abiding citizens and do not pose a danger to society. The right to appear on a ballot affects not only candidates who want to run but voters who want to vote for them. As I stated in a TV interview earlier today, ACSOL would have challenged this bill if it became law.
Great News for Registered Citizens who want to be involved in Government
Need to start asking these folks at every chance what are they thinking, if at all, when they propose a solution to a non-existent problem. Are they that hard up for votes?
Wait a minute, I just read on the California legislature’s website that the bill has been granted reconsideration in a 5-0 vote. However, as of this time no further election committee hearings have been scheduled. Can anybody tell me precisely what this means for the bill?
I hope California registrants or their family members run for office and show the California government as well as the public that they are law abiding citizens and want the best for everyone. Unlike the beasts in office now who can’t comprehend or don’t care that the facts go against their narrow worldview and are to fearful due to the mess that they created claiming registrants were the worst of the worst who can’t control their urges and re-offend at frightening and high rates.
I will write in PFRs TOP to BOTTOM now. Please please please run.
Dear Janice (et al),
Yesterday’s Saturday 2-hour informational fellowship at Sacramento’s Center for Spiritual Healing was lovely. It was warm and informative. I had no regrets driving 1 1/2 hours to Sacramento. Thank you, Jannice (and Roger and Sherry!) for all you do. Always.
I did want to bring up one little thing I discovered in my very light research on this topic. Please look up the following public office individuals, as well as their year of election.
Joel Gaston (2021)Greg Gianforte (2017)Angela Walker (2025)Dan Trevathan (1997)Aaron Spencer (2026)G. Gordon Liddy (1968)Sheila Corfilus-McCormick (2026) (FLORIDA; of all states…)Keren Vasquez (2026) (Arizona)Leesa Jengkins (1990)Tiffany Thigpin (2024)Catherin Pugh (1999, 2005, 2019)Adam Bradley (2010)Max Miller (2026)Charles Lombardi (2025)Ex-president Andrew Jackson (1829) (a notable example during the “Era of Dueling”, which meant that what President Jackson did was…. tsk…. common)
See that, folks? People with violent/egregious histories (or current processes) have ran for and have successfully held seats in public offices.
I’m glad the struck-down of this bill was Janice’s latest achievement. We can bear the above list in mind, the next time another registrant-unfriendly officer attempts another one on us.
As a post-note, I want to mention that I reserve no judgement, ill-will or hostility towards any of these individuals; most especially since I admittingly don’t know the first thing about any of them. (News articles can never inform it to us!). They all served their times a long time ago or will potentially serve their times in upcoming due time. Certainly, their history does not dictate their ability to be concerned for our communities and to be great leaders in society. On the other hand, if we can have that courtesy for them, I only wish that it would be returned for registrants like us.