Voter ID supporters are suing California's attorney general over the definition of the vote

SACRAMENTO – Supporters of a November ballot measure that would require Californians to verify their identity when they vote sued state officials Monday, alleging bias in the way the ballot summary is written.

A group led by California State Assemblyman Carl DeMaio (R-San Diego) alleges in a 10-page lawsuit filed in Sacramento Superior Court that Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta violated election rules that require a “nonpartisan” label for the purpose of the measure.

DeMaio accused Bonta of trying to “make a vote” against the measure “under the false headline that it prevents citizens from voting” in California elections.

He also said the measure, which will appear as Proposition 39 on the November ballot, “is a bipartisan solution to Voter ID and is supported by the majority of Democratic, independent and Republican voters.”

“We take our duty to prepare the title and summary and ballot label very seriously, and we are confident that the court will agree that we have done that duty in good faith here,” said a Bonta spokesperson.

Proposition 39 would require voters to present government-issued identification, such as a state driver's license, every time they vote in person.

Voters using mail-in ballots — the most popular voting method in California — will be required to write a four-digit number, a PIN, on their ballot envelopes. The PIN will appear on an ID such as a driver's license or it can be generated in the state.

The measure also requires the secretary of state and county election officials to maintain accurate voter registration lists, verify citizenship, and report annually the percentage of each county's voter list that is verified by citizenship.

Under current law, Californians are required to provide identification when registering to vote and must swear under penalty of perjury, a felony, that they are eligible to vote and are US citizens.

They are not required to show or provide identification when voting in person or by mail.

The lawsuit, filed by Californians for Voter ID, Yes on the 39th and Donald DiCostanzo, a registered voter who lives in Orange County, argued that the summary of the attorney general's office “is not a true and unbiased statement of the intent of the measure” and violates California Election Code 9051, which requires neutrality.

The lawsuit says the language used in the brief during signature gathering — a necessary step to get the measure on the ballot — was “neutral” and served both of the measure's primary purposes.

The final language waives the measure's authority to maintain accurate voter rolls and verify citizenship, and defines the measure in “restrictive terms,” ​​according to the ruling.

The original language said the measure “establishes additional voter identification and citizenship verification requirements.”

“This measure would amend the California Constitution to continue to require voters to present a state-issued ID at the polls or the last four digits of a state-issued ID number when voting by mail; the State provides fall cards upon request; and election officials report annually the percentage of voters in each state who have verified their citizenship.”

The condensed language now reads the measure: “Prohibits citizens from voting unless they present a government-issued ID.”

“Void mail-in ballots that do not have the last government-issued ID numbers written on the envelope. Prohibit in-person voting without presenting a government-issued ID.”

Election law expert Fred Woocher said the law allows the summary of the polling rate to be different than the definition of the rate being distributed.

UCLA law professor Rick Hasen declined to weigh in on the arguments in the case, but said “it's common practice for the AG to write things in a way that suits the Attorney General's political interests.”

Hasen previously called the ballot measure “a disaster,” writing in a blog post that its requirements are unclear and would make it more expensive and difficult for agencies to verify citizenship.

Supporters of a measure to end California's gas tax hike sued then Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra, who is now a candidate for governor, in 2017 because of the government's draft title and summary that they argued were misleading and bad.

The judge sided with the supporters, but an appeals court later ruled in Becerra's favor.