Fresno City Councilman and Yakuza game reject Miguel Arias THREATENS to prevent Registered persons from entering public buildings

At first I thought this loser was a rejected midboss
design from the Yakuza games.

In January 2026, 41-year-old Rene Campos, a Registered Person.  applied to run for the Fresno City Council’s District 7 seat. Campos had been convicted for a CP offense in 2018 and served 2 years on probation. Under current California and Fresno law, nothing bars sex offenders like him from running. District 3 Councilmember Miguel Arias even compared Campos to a high-profile sex trafficker sweeping the news. “I did hear some of the concerns of a potential future or former Epstein-type candidate coming to this dais,” Arias told Your Central Valley news in Fresno. “Any given Thursday, we have kids in this room. We have families.”

Of course, the first question is whether Fresno can even do that? Fresno is a “Charter City,” which means that, unlike “general law cities” that are restriction only to the general laws governing municipalities in the state, a Charter City has a lot of leeway in creatin and enforcing their own rules and regulations. As noted in a ummary by US Berkley, “Article XI, section 3(a) of the California Constitution authorizes the adoption of a city charter and provides such a charter has the force and effect of state law. Article XI, section 5(a), the ‘home rule’ provision, affirmatively grants to charter cities supremacy over "municipal affairs." However, the California Constitution does not define the term ‘municipal affair.’... Whether a given activity is a municipal affair over which a city has sovereignty, or a statewide concern, over which the legislature has authority, is a legal determination for the courts to resolve. Thus, the determination of whether a given activity is a municipal affair or statewide concern is done on a case-by-case basis. The court's determination will depend on the particular facts and circumstances of each case. Keep in mind that the concept of ‘municipal affairs’ is a fluid one that changes over time as local issues become statewide concerns”. – (Source: UC Berkley, “Foundational Aspects of Charter Cities.” https://www.law.berkeley.edu/files/Albuquerque3_-_Foundational_Aspects_of_Charter_Cities.pdf). In short, This power is limited only by the charter itself and by statutes (state laws) on matters of statewide concern.

While a lawsuit would likely have to be filed to determine whether allowing certain people to run for public office is a municipal affair or a government interest, the California Supreme Court had made previous rulings that limited a community’s ability to limit the lives of Registrants. In 2014, the Fourth Appellate District of the California Court of Appeal, in People v. Nguyen, 222 Cal. App. 4th 1168 (2014), held that a local ordinance making it a misdemeanor for registered persons to enter a park where children regularly gather without permission from law enforcement is preempted by state law. Specifically, the Court found that the legislature enacted a comprehensive statutory scheme that “Fully Occupies the Field”. This means that even if the state did not specifically state that municipalities cannot state in their statutes that municipalities cannot pass their own ordinances regulating the lives of Registered Persons, “The Legislature expressly declared its intent to establish a comprehensive and standardized system for regulating s*x o**enders when it passed the S*x O**ender Punishment, Control, and Containment Act of 2006... Considering the Legislature's declared intent coupled with the scope and nature of the restrictions the foregoing Penal Code sections imposed, we conclude the Legislature established a complete system for regulating a s*x o**ender's daily life and manifested a legislative intent to fully occupy the field to the exclusion of Section 4–14–803 and other local regulations.   Considered as a whole, these statutes regulate much more than the geographic restrictions imposed on a sex offender.   They regulate numerous aspects of a s*x o**ender's life so that both law enforcement and the public can monitor the s*x o**ender on a daily basis.”

Campos told FOX26 he deserves a second chance and has taken the necessary steps to reintegrate into society: “A constant battle of proving and proving and proving. How far does the person have to go before they have rehabilitated? When is it enough? How far does the person have to go? I stand in front of Fresno City Council and still they don't believe in the very laws they're pushing,” When asked about the proposed legislation to block his candidacy, Campos said: “My focus is District 7. However, this this reaches way further than Fresno, California, and so forth. The more people you put in a box, the easier it is to put the next person in a box.” 

ABC30 Action News then reported that “Fresno City Leaders are moving forward with plans for an ordinance that would bar a potential council candidate, who is a registered (person), from being able to enter various city facilities. That candidate is now pushing back. ‘The constitution does not grant government the authority to pre-select who is worthy of democracy. Voters decide, not councils, not rhetoric, not fear,’ says Rene Campos.” In response,  Miguel Arias, Fresno City Councilman, threatened, “We're not going to allow our city to be represented by s*x o**enders. We have limits around state law that we can't control, but there is a lot of control that we do have locally... We have plenty of broad authority and ability to limit access.”  Council Member Miguel Arias says the city intends to extend those restrictions with an ordinance that would bar any registered s*x o**ender from city facilities like council chambers, community centers, police and fire stations.

-- So, Miguel's so dumb he wants to bar Registered Persons even from the Registration office? What a tool. 

If this ordinance passes, Fresno gets sued, they lose the case then offer a huge settlement. Easy money!

Honestly I had to make sure this was Fresco CA and that there's no Fresno in FloriDUH. 

Maybe Miguel WAS mentioned in the Yakuza games after all

COVID Conspiracy nut and Opponent of Affordable Healthcare, US Rep. Greg Steube, wants to eliminate Medicaid and healthcare tax credits for Persons Forced to Register

Greg Steube, Republican & Floridiot, wants to ban ALL Registered Persons from obtaining Medicaid AND eliminate tax credits under the Affordable Care Act. This isn’t the first time that Congress had targeted RPs from government assistance. In 2010, Congress passed a bill banning RPs from obtaining Small Business Loans from the Small Business Administration; they had also tried passing legislation in 2010 banning RPs from receiving Federal Housing Loans and Unemployment Compensation but both failed to fully advance in time. (Both passed the House but failed to advance in the Senate.) Under this current administration, this has a better chance of passing. Of course, Trump and his cronies will continue to gt the best healthcare money can buy, while RPs and their families will be forced to suffer without adequate healthcare.

Steuben has been a staunch opponent of the Affordable Care Act. During thre COVID-19 Pandemic, he was also among those conspiacy theorists claiming that the “deep state” at the FDA was preventing the use of hydroxychloroquine, an antimalarial drug, to treat COVID-19. Medical experts note that hydroxychloroquine neither treats nor prevents infection by COVID-19. He is also a defender of the J6 insurrection & promotes the conspiracy that the 2020 was “stolen.” (I'm generally not a fan of Wikipedia but in this instance, they've done a good job of covering this assclown's voting record.)

He was also accessed of impropriety for possible illegal work while acting as a lobbyist. 

The bill is HR 7453 (119th Congress, 2025-2026)

(Source: Rep. Steube: No ACA or Medicaid for Sex Offenders.” Rep. Greg Steube. 2/10/2026. https://steube.house.gov/press-releases/rep-steube-no-aca-or-medicaid-for-sex-offenders/)

U.S. Representative Greg Steube (R-Fla.) introduced yesterday the Criminals’ Loss of Eligibility and Assistance Networks Act or CLEAN Act. This bill prohibits sex offenders from receiving federally funded Medicaid benefits as well as the refundable tax credit for health insurance under the Affordable Care Act. 

“Sex offenders have no business tapping into programs intended for lower-income and disadvantaged Americans,” said Rep. Steube. “Taxpayers have the right to know their hard-earned money is not being used to cover the medical expenses of serial abusers and criminals. Rapists and abusers have no business receiving federal benefits. My bill will protect Medicaid and ACA assistance for law-abiding Americans by barring sex offenders from accessing these programs.” 

Background: The CLEAN Act amends the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to prohibit sex offenders from receiving the refundable tax credit for coverage with a qualified health plan under the Affordable Care Act. It also amends the Social Security Act to make sex offenders ineligible for federally funded benefits under Medicaid.