Environment
No direct effect
Neutral — no direct effect identified.
Benefits
- No material direct effect identified
Risks
- No material direct effect identified
StateWyomingEnacted
HB 92: Registered sex offenders prohibited from public office.
Ann Lucas
HB 92 status: Enacted — Assigned Chapter Number 96 (updated Mar 8, 2026).
Source
OpenStates
Confidence
Low
Analysis basis
OpenStates summary
01
What this bill does
Official summary alongside an AI-generated read on where it stands and why.
Overall Score
62OUT OF 100
Score:62/100 civic fit
Risk:Moderate Risk
Impact:Moderate Impact 50/100
Constitutionality50%
Bipartisan70%
Public opinion85%
Bill summary
This bill establishes qualifications for specified public offices, specifically disqualifying individuals registered as sex offenders from holding these positions. The bill defines "sex offender" as a person currently registered on the central registry of offenders under W.S. 7-19-301 through 7-19-310. Specifies that election officials must refuse to certify ineligible candidates, and offices held by disqualified individuals will be deemed vacant. Applies to individuals elected or appointed to public office on or after July 1, 2026.
02
Impact analysis
✦ AI analysisModeled effects across six domains, estimated from bill text and comparable legislation.
Economy
No direct effect
Neutral — no direct effect identified.
Benefits
- No material direct effect identified
Risks
- No material direct effect identified
Society
Mixed / Neutral
60%
Benefits
- Increases public trust in representative institutions
- Ensures officials meet specific moral qualifications
- Promotes community standards for public leadership
Risks
- Limits individual political participation rights
- Creates significant lifelong collateral consequences
- Disenfranchises individuals regardless of crime context
Technology Industry
No direct effect
Neutral — no direct effect identified.
Benefits
- No material direct effect identified
Risks
- No material direct effect identified
Civic Accountability
Positive outlook
70%
Benefits
- Standardizes eligibility criteria for all public offices
- Empowers election officials with clear rejection authority
- Mandates administrative removal for ineligible individuals
Risks
- Reduces range of choices for the voting electorate
- Centralizes authority in election officials to police status
- Risk of errors in registry status impacting eligibility
Public Health & Safety
Mixed / Neutral
55%
Benefits
- Protects institutions from risks of offender influence
- Improves public sense of safety in state offices
- Enhances oversight of public official backgrounds
Risks
- Does not address underlying public health root causes
- Assumes categorical risk based on registry status
- May divert attention from other oversight measures
03
How trustworthy & consequential it is
Sourcing already shown above, this is what the analysis found worth flagging.
Source
OpenStates
Official bill text or data from OpenStates.
Confidence
Low
Information is limited or incomplete.
Analysis basis
OpenStates summary
Source used for this bill's analysis.
Source note
Potential due process or constitutional challenges regarding disenfranchisement.
Analysis scope
Source provided is a summary abstract, not full bill text.
04
Where it stands
Official recordAssigned Chapter Number 96
- IntroducedComplete
- CommitteeComplete
- Chamber votesComplete
- Final agreementComplete
- GovernorComplete
- EnactedComplete
05
How it affects your district
✦ Personalized
Set your location
Add your district to see how this bill may affect your community and who to contact.
Your Representatives
Your representatives appear here once you add your location.
06
Take action
Contact your representatives
Let them know how you feel about this bill.
Share your view
Join the discussion and see what others are saying.
Track this bill
Stay updated on progress and changes.