California Bill AB 2691 Amendments Allow Convicted Child Sex Offenders to Seek Office

California Senate Bill AB 2691, originally intended to bar anyone convicted of a felony sexual assault or human trafficking from holding elected office, was amended by Senator Scott Wiener to exempt certain offenses involving minors. Under the amendment, a felony conviction for sexual assault against an adult remains disqualifying, but comparable offenses against a minor would not automatically trigger a ban. The amended bill cleared the Senate Elections and Constitutional Amendment Committee and is slated for a Senate floor vote.

Could California keep convicted child predators eligible for public office?

Senator Scott Wiener, who sponsored the amendment, labeled opposition “political cynicism” and suggested future legislation could address any gaps. Senator Steven Choi, vice-chair of the committee, withdrew his support, stating he could not back a bill that would allow “pedophiles and child groomers” to hold office. Assemblywoman Esmeralda Soria noted the bill does not create new crimes but would bar individuals required to register as sex offenders from serving. Greg Burt, president of the California Family Council, testified against the amendments.

Could California keep convicted child predators eligible for public office?

Wiener cited a 2017 estimate that roughly one in 400 Californians appears on the state sex-offender registry. A companion measure, AB 2753, would have barred all registered sex offenders from elected office but failed to advance after Wiener’s amendment limited it to tier-3 registrants.

Could California keep convicted child predators eligible for public office?

Greg Burt said the exemptions lack a stated rationale and reverse protections found in other states, asserting they “protect child victims least exactly where the protection is needed most.” He expressed disbelief at the bill’s language. Senator Choi echoed confusion, saying he could not reconcile the exclusions with the bill’s purpose. The California Family Council warned the changes create “loopholes that raise serious questions about who can hold public office.” Assemblywoman Soria recalled the Fresno incident, describing community reaction as “shocked and outraged.”

Could California keep convicted child predators eligible for public office?

Committee analysis did not explain why offenses against minors were excluded, a point repeatedly raised by critics. Proponents have not offered a public justification for the selective exemptions, leaving a gap between the legislation’s stated goal of protecting the public and its actual provisions.

Could California keep convicted child predators eligible for public office?

• “I cannot understand why these exclusions have been made,” — Steven Choi, Senator, Vice-chair of the Senate Elections and Constitutional Amendment Committee

Could California keep convicted child predators eligible for public office?

• “Our community was shocked and outraged that a registered sex offender could run for office,” — Esmeralda Soria, Assemblywoman

Could California keep convicted child predators eligible for public office?

• “California deserves laws that protect children—not loopholes that raise serious questions about who can hold public office.” — California Family Council statement

Could California keep convicted child predators eligible for public office?

• “political cynicism,” — Scott Wiener, Senator

Could California keep convicted child predators eligible for public office?

AB 2691 is slated for a Senate floor vote. Supporters say future bills can address the identified gaps, while opponents plan to introduce new legislation to close the exemptions. The failure of AB 2753 indicates ongoing debate over the appropriate scope of restrictions on registered sex offenders seeking elected office.

Could California keep convicted child predators eligible for public office?