SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Californians for Voter ID, Yes on 39, the committee advocating for the passage of Proposition 39, today filed a legal challenge in Sacramento County Superior Court against California Attorney General Rob Bonta over his last-minute revision of the ballot title, summary and label for the Voter ID Initiative. Bonta made the change after the measure already qualified for the November 2026 ballot.

When the measure circulated for signatures, the Attorney General’s official title accurately read: “ESTABLISHES ADDITIONAL VOTER IDENTIFICATION AND CITIZENSHIP VERIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.” On July 3, 2026, after the measure had qualified for the ballot without a single edit, the Attorney General replaced with: “PROHIBITS CITIZENS FROM VOTING UNLESS THEY PRESENT GOVERNMENT-ISSUED IDENTIFICATION.”

The measure does not prohibit anyone from voting. It sets requirements for verifying a voter’s identity before a ballot is counted, just like the current use of signatures on mail ballots. For the more than 80 percent of Californians who vote by mail (about 13 million of the roughly 16 million ballots cast in November 2024), it asks only for the last four digits of an identification number the voter has already designated. No eligible citizen is turned away from the polls; the measure refers to the casting of provisional ballots, which is required by both federal and state law. And the overwhelming majority of California voters who vote by mail do not have to “present” identification to anyone.

The lawsuit argues the revised title and summary violate California Elections Code section 9051(e), which requires the Attorney General to give a “true and impartial statement of the purpose of the measure” that is “neither an argument, nor … likely to create prejudice, for or against the proposed measure.” The committee contends the July 3 language abandons the neutral description voters relied on during signature-gathering and instead adopts wording designed to influence the outcome of the election.

The rewritten title also drops one of the measure’s two core purposes entirely: a new duty on state and county officials to keep voter rolls accurate and verify citizenship.

The Attorney General’s own official title for the preceding ten months, and the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s summary in the very same voter guide, both describe the measure in neutral terms, showing that accurate, impartial language was readily available and simply was not used.

More than 1.3 million Californians signed petitions to place Proposition 39 on the ballot, relying on the Attorney General’s original, neutral title and summary issued in September 2025.

“The measure doesn’t stop a single eligible citizen from voting, it asks mail voters for four digits of an ID number they already chose,” said Californians for Voter ID, Yes on 39. “Telling voters it ‘prohibits citizens from voting’ isn’t a summary; it’s the opposite of what the measure says.”

“Whether you support or oppose this measure, voters deserve a ballot description that is accurate and impartial,” the committee continued. “By rewriting the title at the finish line, after 1.3 million people signed based on a fair description, the Attorney General is casting doubt on the fairness of the process itself.”

The committee, represented by official proponent and registered California voter Donald DiConstanzo, filed the petition under Elections Code sections 9051 and 9092 as a priority election matter. It asks the court, on an expedited basis, to order the title, summary, and ballot label corrected before the Secretary of State submits the Voter Information Guide to the state printer at the close of the public-examination period on August 10, 2026.

If enacted, Proposition 39 would establish voter-identification requirements for in-person voting; require the last four digits of a designated government-issued identification number on vote-by-mail ballot envelopes; provide state-issued voter identification cards on request; and require annual public reporting on the verification of voters’ citizenship.

“The Attorney General has a duty to describe this measure neutrally, not to argue against it,” said the committee. “We’re asking the court to hold him to that duty so that voters get an honest description when they decide this measure in November.”

For more information, please visit VoterIDCA.org.

###

About Californians for Voter ID, Yes on 39

Californians for Voter ID, Yes on 39 is a committee to promote the common-sense measure, Proposition 39, on the November 3, 2026 ballot. The petition collected more than 1.3 million signatures from Democrats, Independents and Republicans from all 58 counties. We intend to restore trust in California’s elections by ensuring every lawful ballot is counted and each valid vote is fully protected.