By admin 
Backers of a California ballot measure seeking to create a voter ID requirement faced two legal setbacks Thursday.
Read more Teachers union that backed state superintendent now wants his help in Sac City mess | Opinion
In one case, a Sacramento Superior Court judge rejected supporters request to change the ballot title and summary of Proposition 39, which they argued were prejudicial and misleading. In a separate case, a different Sacramento judge rejected Prop. 39 backers’ claims, set to appear in a state voter guide, that the ballot measure would make voting easier, more secure and save the state money.
In the first case, lawyers representing Californians for Voter ID argued that the title Democratic Attorney General Rob Bonta assigned to Prop. 39, “Prohibits Citizens From Voting Unless They Present Government-Issued Identification” failed to accurately reflect the measure. The group argued that the proposition didn’t prevent people without an ID from voting, but rather, prevented that vote from being counted.
That argument didn’t hold water with Judge Jennifer Rockwell, who said the ballot measure would explicitly prohibit people from casting ballots if they didn’t show identification. And citing the dictionary definition of “vote,” Rockwell said the word plainly included the tallying of a ballot, not just the ticking of a box.
In the second case, brought by Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, D-Hollister, and Senate President Pro Tempore Monique Limón, D-Santa Barbara, the plaintiffs sought to prevent Prop. 39 supporters from making a series of “false and misleading” claims about the measure in voter guides: that it would make voting easier, more secure, and save the state money.
In a ruling issued Thursday, Judge Shelleyanne Chang agreed those arguments were not grounded in facts.
Read more One man’s lonely struggle to recover Sacramento’s lost Black history | Opinion
“It is hard to conceive how it would be ‘easy’ or ‘easier’ to vote if a voter has to take the extra step of either bringing government-issued identification when voting in person or search for their government-issued identification and supply the last four digits if they vote by mail,” Chang wrote, citing the Merriam-Webster definition of “easy.”
Chang also cited research from nonpartisan legislative analysts who found Prop. 39 would increase the costs of election administration by at least tens of millions of dollars. And she noted that Prop. 39 would require voters to include the last four digits of an ID number on mail-in ballots, an option she said would make elections “less private and less secure.”
Californians for Voter ID spokesperson Meredith Shields said she wasn’t sure whether the group would appeal the verdicts. But she argued voters would “judge Proposition 39 on its merits and not on biased ballot language.”
In a post on X, Bonta said his office “fulfilled its duty to provide California voters with clear, accessible, and accurate information.” Limón accused Prop. 39 backers of “trying to hide that Prop. 39 would make it harder for Californians to vote, cost the state up to hundreds of millions of dollars, and endanger personal voter information for voters.”
Read more Cockroach infestation forced temporary closure of Sacramento Mexican restaurant
This story was originally published August 7, 2026 at 10:40 AM.