This isn't accurate: "If it is a mandated code by your state then it is a transferable credit...state schools have to take the credit if they offer similar classes." Each school individually determines what transfer credits they'll accept. Typically regionally accredited schools will not accept credits from nationally accredited schools, although there are very rare exceptions. But there is certainly no mandate that requires state schools to accept credits from nationally accredited schools.
It's also not accurate to say, from an earlier comment, "any school worth its salt will only accept credits or degrees from a 'regionally accredited schools' such as SACS, etc." Regional accreditation focuses more on academics, while national accreditation tends to focus more on career education. This doesn't necessarily mean regionally accredited schools are inherently better or more rigorous (and although better/more rigorous schools overwhelmingly tend to be regionally accredited schools, there are plenty of good and rigorous nationally accredited schools). They each serve their purpose - you go to a nationally accredited school because you want to work in a specific career focus; you go to a regionally accredited school because you want an academically inclined program that focuses on critical and analytical thinking. But the latter can certainly prepare you for a profession, and the former can certainly instill strong critical and analytical thinking skills.
There are poor schools that are nationally accredited, and there are poor schools that are regionally accredited. There are problems with national accrediting bodies, and there are problems with regional accrediting bodies.
None of this has anything to do with the original post - I just wanted to correct a few items in the comments. For teach-out campuses - I don't work at a teach-out campus, but I have colleagues who work at a few different ones. The situation varies - at some, there's a strong sense of pride and students do not want to leave and transfer to a different campus, but it's slowly being strangled by uncaring regional/national management that's focused entirely on cost vs. income. At others, there's been mass hemorrhaging of students because there weren't good people left that still gave them a sense of purpose, mission, and direction. In all cases it's very sad and depressing, though, and the only real difference is whether the folks who are left can look back to when things were genuinely good vs. never having had those good times to look back on.