Story · October 15, 2026

California appellate court preserves injunction blocking Shasta County’s Measure B

Election rules Confidence 5/5
★★★★☆Fuckup rating 4/5
Serious fuckup Ranked from 1 to 5 stars based on the scale of the screwup and fallout.
Correction: On August 28, 2026, the California Third District Court of Appeal preserved the lower court’s preliminary injunction blocking Measure B; the trial court injunction had been entered on August 7, 2026.
California appellate court preserves injunction blocking Shasta County’s Measure B

A California appellate court has preserved a preliminary injunction blocking Shasta County’s Measure B, keeping the county from enforcing the voter overhaul while the case continues. The state’s top election officials sued in June, a trial court granted the injunction in August, and the Court of Appeal later declined to let the county implement the measure for the November election. ([oag.ca.gov](https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-bonta-and-secretary-state-weber-continue-challenge-shasta?utm_source=openai))

Measure B would have required government-issued photo identification to register to vote and vote in person. It also would have ended vote-by-mail and most early voting options, required ballots to be hand-counted, and created a separate county voter registration system disconnected from California’s statewide system. According to the attorney general’s office, the state argued the measure conflicted with election laws covering voter ID, mail voting, early voting, ballot counting, and registration. ([oag.ca.gov](https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-bonta-and-secretary-state-weber-continue-challenge-shasta?utm_source=openai))

The appellate ruling did not decide the case on the merits. It preserved the lower court’s preliminary injunction, meaning Measure B remains blocked for now while the litigation proceeds in trial court. The attorney general’s office said the order ensures Shasta County must keep following state election law during the dispute. ([oag.ca.gov](https://oag.ca.gov/node/629023?utm_source=openai))

The lawsuit landed in state court after the Third District Court of Appeal determined it should first be considered there. In its filings, the state said Measure B exceeded the county’s authority and would disrupt the election calendar if allowed to take effect. Those claims remain part of the ongoing case, not a final judgment. ([oag.ca.gov](https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-bonta-and-secretary-state-weber-continue-challenge-shasta?utm_source=openai))

Proof attached

Sources used for this report

These are the source links stored with this report when it was published. Open them directly to inspect the underlying reporting or primary document.

Reader action

Check the official election rules

Verify your registration, polling location, ballot options, and deadlines through official state or local election sources before acting on claims shared online.

Timing: Before the applicable registration, absentee, or early-voting deadline.

This card only appears on stories where there is a concrete, lawful, worthwhile step a reader can actually take.

Comments

Threaded replies, voting, and reports are live. New users still go through screening on their first approved comments.

Log in to comment


No comments yet. Be the first reasonably on-topic person here.