US News Metro Long Island Politics

Sports NFL MLB Olympics NBA NHL College Football College Basketball WNBA

Entertainment TV Movies Music Celebrities Awards Theater

Lifestyle Weird But True Sex & Relationships Viral Trends Human Interest Parenting Fashion & Beauty Food & Drink Travel

Health Wellness Fitness Health Care Medicine Men’s Health Women’s Health Mental Health Nutrition

Science Space Environment Wildlife Archaeology

Today’s Paper Covers Columnists Horoscopes Crosswords & Games Sports Odds Podcasts Careers

Email Newsletters Official Store Home Delivery Tips

Switch between CA and NY editions here.

California’s cowardly U-turn on barring sex offenders from office

See more of our coverage in your search results.

Californians should be able to agree that convicted sex offenders should not be allowed to hold public office.

Yet legislators killed a proposed ban because of a bizarre fight over which sex offenses should count.

The issue came up after a registered sex offender announced his candidacy for City Council in Fresno County, shocking local voters.

Local officials searched for a legal basis to keep him off the ballot, but because no law prohibited a registered sex offender from running for local office, there was little they could do.

Ultimately, the candidate failed to gather enough signatures to qualify. But the incident exposed a glaring gap in California law.

In response, legislators introduced two straightforward, bipartisan reforms to ensure it could not happen again.

AB 2753 would prohibit registered sex offenders from qualifying for the ballot. AB 2691 would prohibit individuals convicted of sexual assault or human trafficking from seeking elected office. Neither proposal was controversial. Both passed the Assembly without a single vote in opposition.

They reflected a simple principle: Those who have committed some of society’s most serious crimes should not be entrusted with positions of public trust.

But Democrat Scott Wiener of San Francisco, chair........

© New York Post