California sues Shasta County over newly passed voter ID ballot measure

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (CN) — California’s attorney general, in a Friday lawsuit, slammed a Shasta County ballot measure he said violates state election law.

Measure B appeared headed for passage with 55.6% of the vote in Shasta County. The measure would require government-issued identification to register and vote, largely eliminate vote-by-mail and early voting, mandate hand-counted ballots and create a county voter registration system separate from the state’s.

“Indeed, the measure’s defects are so extreme that the county previously filed a lawsuit seeking to be relieved of its obligation to prepare a title and summary for the initiative, and the initiative’s lead proponent has openly acknowledged that ‘there are sections that are illegal,’” Attorney General Rob Bonta writes in the suit.

Filing suit in the state’s Third District Court of Appeal, Bonta asked a judge to invalidate Measure B, halt its implementation and undo any steps already taken to enforce it.

Bonta urged the court to rule by Aug. 24, arguing Shasta County voters need certainty before the Nov. 3 general election about how to register, whether their registration is active and where they can vote.

While Shasta County’s charter status gives it some authority to enact local laws that conflict with state law, Bonta argues it has no authority to regulate elections. He adds that even if it did, state law prohibits photo ID requirements and guarantees access to vote-by-mail and early voting.

“In short, even if the county disagrees with state election laws, it may not enact or enforce its own laws ’that are inconsistent with or impede statewide regulation of the integrity of the political or electoral process,’” the attorney general writes, citing the 1992 Fourth Appellate District case of Johnson v. Bradley.

According to Bonta, Measure B originated with the Save Shasta Elections group, which began gathering signatures in spring 2025. The county sought to avoid drafting the measure’s title and summary, arguing the proposed changes could not legally be enacted through the ballot process.

A judge rejected the request. Later that year, the county registrar determined the measure had qualified for the ballot and the Board of Supervisors voted to place it before voters on June 2.

Another judge also declined to block the measure from appearing on the ballot, finding that any challenge to its legality was better addressed after the election.

Bonta argues that the Legislature has control over state elections. It’s already decided that people can register to vote in person, online or at the Department of Motor Vehicles. All voters can use a mail-in ballot and vote before Election Day, as well.

“County elections officials may only count votes using a voting system that has been certified by the secretary of state,” Bonta writes, pointing to what he considers another of Measure B’s flaws. “They may not hand-count ballots except with the secretary’s approval in specified elections with less than 5,000 voters.”

A county, even one with charter status, has no power to supersede state law, he adds.

Measure B isn’t the first time Shasta County has butted heads with the state over elections.

In January 2023, county supervisors terminated Shasta County’s voting-system lease with Dominion Voting Systems. They later directed staff to develop procedures for hand-counting ballots and select a new voting-equipment vendor for voters with disabilities.

Dominion became a national flashpoint after conspiracy theories falsely claimed its machines were used to sway the 2020 presidential election in favor of Joe Biden. In 2023, Fox News agreed to pay Dominion $787.5 million to settle a defamation lawsuit.

The 2023 move by Shasta County supervisors led to the passage of a state law that forbids manual vote tallies in a jurisdiction with over 1,000 registered voters.

“Measure B is legally indefensible,” Bonta said in a statement. “It directly conflicts with state law and threatens to upend the orderly administration of elections. The stakes are especially high because voters in Shasta County are just months away from casting their ballots in the November midterms.”

A Shasta County representative declined to comment.