California voter ID ballot measure challenged in court

The plaintiffs have asked a Sacramento County judge to move quickly, as printing deadlines are rapidly approaching.SACRAMENTO, Calif. (CN) — A pro-voter ID group filed suit Monday against California’s secretary of state and attorney general over a change to the wording of a ballot initiative that will be decided in November’s election.Proposition 39 seeks to impose identification requirements for Golden State voters. If approved, voters would have to show government-issued ID at the polls, or provide the last four digits of a government-issued ID number when voting by mail. Additionally, California would have to provide voter ID cards when requested, and elections officials would have annual reporting requirements, showing the percentage of each county’s voters whose citizenship they’ve verified.No ID is currently required at the state’s polls.Californians for Voter ID, Yes on 39 and an Orange County voter filed suit in Sacramento County Superior Court over a change Attorney General Rob Bonta’s office made to the measure’s title and summary. Initially, it stated the proposition “Establishes additional voter identification and citizenship verification requirements.” Bonta’s office changed it to: “Prohibits citizens from voting unless they present government-issued identification.”“That statement is not a true and impartial statement of the measure’s purpose,” the plaintiffs write in their complaint.The plaintiffs are asking a judge to require the state to amend or strike the challenged language and have the secretary of state include the new language in the voter information guide. Alternatively, they want the phrase “prohibits citizens from voting” removed.They also want the suit resolved quickly, as election deadlines loom.A public examination period for the ballot measures lasts from July 21 to Aug. 10, after which they go to a printer.The plaintiffs say the measure wouldn’t prohibit someone from casting a ballot, but instead affects whether that vote is counted, as a voter’s identity must be verified for it to count. It doesn’t require those who vote by mail to show ID, the plaintiffs claim, saying those voters would provide digits on an ID that the state could match with already existing records.The plaintiffs argue that while the original language is neutral and states the measure’s two main purposes, the attorney general added prohibitive terms and tweaked the summary, saying it invalidates mail ballots without the last four digits of a government ID written on the envelope, and prohibits in-person voting if the person does not show ID.The ballot label makes no mention of the duty to maintain accurate voter rolls and verify citizenship, the plaintiffs say.“The lead characterization in the title, summary, and label, that the measure ‘prohibits citizens from voting,’ is affirmatively inaccurate,” the plaintiffs say in the complaint. “By its terms the measure regulates which ballots are counted, not whether a citizen may cast one.”Pointing to the printing deadline, the plaintiffs say that without a swift decision from a judge, the attorney general’s wording will reach millions of voters in the state’s voter information guide.Bonta fielded questions last week about the lawsuit, which he was anticipating. He said his office prepared nine voter-initiated ballot measures for the upcoming November election.“All nine of them had changes,” he added. “All nine. It would be strange if Prop 39 had none. It’s very common.”The attorney general also called the proponents’ language inappropriate and false.“It is more helpful to voters,” he said of his office’s changes. “It is more accurate.”State Senator Tony Strickland, a Huntington Beach Republican and coauthor of the measure, told Courthouse News in a statement that Proposition 39 drew millions of signatures from across the political spectrum.“It’s shameful that the attorney general is using his power to influence voters through misleading ballot language,” he added. “Public trust depends on keeping politics out of the ballot language. Californians are smart enough to see through the political spin and make their own decisions.”Subscribe to our free newslettersOur weekly newsletter Closing Arguments offers the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world, while the monthly Under the Lights dishes the legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.Additional Reads