An Orange County judge on Monday, April 7, denied the state attorney general’s efforts to overturn Huntington Beach’s voter ID law, saying he disagreed with arguments it would disenfranchise voters in future elections.
“There is no showing that a voter identification requirement compromises the integrity of a municipal election,” Orange County Superior Court Judge Nico Dourbetas wrote in his ruling.
Mayor Pat Burns called the ruling “a huge victory” for Huntington Beach and charter cities throughout California. Huntington Beach officials argue being a charter city allows local leaders greater control over city elections.
The city is fighting to protect the voter-approved Measure A, but its court win this week likely won’t put an end to the case. The state attorney general’s office has already said it will appeal the decision. This is the second time in the case that Dourbetas has ruled against the state.
“Yet again, we believe the Orange County Superior Court got it wrong,” Attorney General Rob Bonta said in a statement. “Now that we have a final order from the Orange County Superior Court, we look forward to moving on and appealing the decision. We remain confident that Measure A will ultimately be struck down.”
Lee Fink, an attorney for Mark Bixby, a resident who sued separately to block the law, said they, too, would appeal after the judge ruled against their suit as well.
“While we are disappointed in the trial court’s ruling, all parties knew that the case would ultimately be decided at the appellate level,” Fink said Monday. “We are confident that the appellate courts will reverse the trial court and stop the city’s unconstitutional and ideologically-driven voter ID requirements.”
Voters in March 2024 approved Measure A, which added language to Huntington Beach’s charter allowing the city to “verify the eligibility of electors by voter identification” beginning in 2026.
The state attorney general’s office filed its lawsuit to stop Huntington Beach a year ago, saying the law was illegal and would confuse voters and disrupt election planning.
A three-judge panel in the Fourth District Court of Appeal, which took an early look at the arguments in the case in February, had described the city’s argument that “it had a constitutional right to regulate its own municipal elections free from state interference” as “problematic.” The panel had asked the Superior Court judge to reconsider his earlier ruling.
Judge Dourbetas heard oral arguments over the voter ID law on Thursday. In Monday’s ruling, Dourbetas wrote that the “challenged charter provision does not violate the right to vote and does not implicate the integrity of the electoral process.”
“While we anticipate this fight isn’t over, we are pleased with the court’s fair and just evaluation of the weakness of the state and Bixby’s legal case,” City Attorney Mike Vigliotta said in a statement.
Attorneys for the state argued that the voter ID law is prohibited by state law that says local governments can’t require voters “to present identification for the purpose of voting or submitting a ballot at any polling place.”
The city argued that the state prohibition on voter ID requirements doesn’t explicitly apply to city elections that aren’t consolidated with statewide elections.
“The court got it wrong,” said Secretary of State Shirley Weber in a statement. “Access to the ballot box is a key component of our democracy. The court’s order is in direct conflict with California election laws and will result in disenfranchising California voters.”
An attorney for the state last week said if Huntington Beach is allowed to proceed with its voter ID law, it could end up with Huntington Beach holding separate city elections that aren’t consolidated and voters receiving two different ballots and needing to go to separate polling places.
City leaders have not detailed how they plan to implement the law.
