SANTA ANA, CA – A petition for writ of mandate was filed this week here with the California Fourth District Court of Appeal, Division Three regarding a proposed voter identification law (Measure A) in Huntington Beach, reported the California Dept. of Justice.
The DOJ, in a statement, explained the city’s charter was amended with Measure A, allowing for voter ID requirements at the polls to be imposed for all municipal elections starting in 2026, adding this was done without the citation of any fraudulent voting evidence regularity in the city that has compromised the municipal election’s outcomes.
The Orange County Superior Court concluded on Nov. 15, 2024, that the state’s lawsuit regarding Measure A against Huntington Beach was unjust because the measure was “permissive and discretionary in character, and thus currently presents no conflict with state elections law,” said DOJ.
On Jan. 14, 2025, DOJ’s statement notes, an appeal for writ of mandate to resolve the whole case on the merits was implemented by California Attorney General Rob Bonta and Secretary of State Shirley Weber in order to not wait to resolve the pending appeal, “on the narrower question of ripeness.”
In the DOJ statement, AG Bonta said, “Secretary Weber and I continue to believe that Huntington Beach’s Measure A is unlawful,” and asked the appellate court to hear the case on the merits instead of waiting.
The AG added his office won’t “allow Huntington Beach to disenfranchise Californians at the polls” because “our elections are already secure, and applicants who register to vote in California are already required to verify their identity during the registration process.”
Secretary of State Weber stated, “As California’s chief elections officer, I stand with Attorney General Bonta in challenging local government actions that violate state law and diminish the right to vote.
“I will continue to advocate for an inclusive democracy and the voices of voters. The writ of mandate filed today seeks to ensure a prompt resolution of Huntington Beach’s unlawful charter amendment.”
AG Bonta and Secretary of State Weber explained in the DOJ statement the appellate court should grant the petition, because “the state lacks an adequate, speedy remedy at law.”
The City of Huntington Beach apparently intends to adopt and enforce voter identification rules after elections officials begin planning for the 2026 elections and mere months before they are held, the DOJ statement added.
Because “there is no other way for the courts to resolve this case quickly enough to prevent elections officials and the city’s voters from suffering harm, the issue presented is one of great statewide, public importance, with significant implications for the successful administration of upcoming elections, the protection of the right to vote, and the constitutional separation of powers between charter cities and the state,” the DOJ added.
The Attorney General and Secretary of State also stated that “this case presents a matter of first impression under the California Constitution and a new state law prohibiting local voter identification rules,” and “resolving this case now serves judicial economy by avoiding numerous appeals raising the same issue.”
The lawsuit filed on April 15, 2024, by AG Bonta and Secretary of State Weber alleged Measure A is “preempted by state law and invalid,” and, under the California Constitution, charter cities have the right to “govern municipal affairs, but local law cannot conflict with state law governing a statewide concern…both the integrity of California’s elections and the protection of the constitutional right to vote are matters of statewide concern.”
The lawsuit further argues California already maintains a uniform and robust legal scheme for “safeguarding the integrity of the electoral process and protecting the rights of eligible voters.”
