Election Law
We help candidates, political committees, corporations, citizen groups, and public agencies navigate the electoral process.
Our attorneys have developed a statewide and national reputation for our active election law and ethics‑in‑government practice, representing clients in compliance matters and in litigation related to redistricting and voting rights; ballot measures; ballot access issues; contested elections; and campaign finance and ethics regulations.
Redistricting & Voting Rights
-
During the last redistricting cycle, we served as outside counsel to the California Citizens Redistricting Commission – an independent body of five Democrats, five Republicans, and four unaffiliated Californians. In that capacity, we advised the Commission on its legal duties under state and federal laws related to redrawing district maps for the State Assembly, State Senate, State Board of Equalization, and United States Congress following the 2020 census. We also represented the Commission before the California Supreme Court in litigation related to the Commission’s deadlines for producing draft and final maps, which were impacted by delays in the release of census data.
-
We have also advised other line drawing bodies, including the Santa Barbara County Citizens Independent Redistricting Commission and the Riverside County Board of Supervisors.
-
In 2023, we defended Riverside County in litigation that alleged the County’s district map for its Board of Supervisors violated the state’s FAIR MAPS Act and the California Constitution. We secured a favorable settlement whereby petitioners agreed to dismiss their suit with prejudice, leaving the supervisorial districts unchanged, in exchange for greater investments in voter outreach and education efforts, among other commitments.
Ballot Measures
Over the years, we have advised and represented countless political committees and citizens groups in the drafting of state and local ballot measures; in litigation over the qualification of initiatives and referenda; and in post-election substantive challenges.
-
With Reform L.A. County Jails, we drafted a successful county-wide ballot initiative that gave subpoena power to the L.A. County Sheriff’s Department Civilian Oversight Commission to effectively and independently investigate misconduct. The measure also created a mandate to develop a plan to reduce jail populations and to redirect the cost savings into alternatives to incarceration.
-
In the City of Palm Springs, we represented Save Oswit Canyon (now Oswit Land Trust) in a multi-year effort that involved an initiative petition and related litigation which resulted in the acquisition of 114 acres of environmentally sensitive property for permanent conservation and public recreation.
-
In the City of Irvine, we have represented advocates for the creation of a veterans cemetery and memorial within the City’s Great Park, which lies on the site of the former Marine Corps Air Station El Toro. We assisted in this effort by advising our clients on a referendum petition, successfully prosecuting a challenge to the ballot question on the referendum, and drafting an initiative measure adopted by the City Council.
-
We have represented numerous ballot measure proponents whose measures were subject to improper efforts to exclude them from ballots and successfully obtained court orders putting the measures before voters in numerous cities, including Sacramento, Burbank, Ventura, Martinez, Yorba Linda, San Clemente, Santa Paula, and Loma Linda.
-
We successfully defended the constitutionality of Measure J, an amendment to the Charter of the County of Los Angeles resoundingly approved by voters in November 2020, securing on appeal the reversal of a trial court judgment that had declared the measure unlawful. The charter amendment, described by the Los Angeles Times as a “sweeping,” “landmark” public safety and criminal justice reform measure, requires annual allocations of at least 10% of locally generated unrestricted revenues for direct community investments and alternatives to incarceration. (Coalition of County Unions v. Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors (2023) 93 Cal.App.5th 1367.)
-
We have also successfully defended the validity of initiative measures following elections, including in published appellate decisions such as Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association v. Padilla (2016) 62 Cal.4th 486, upholding the right of the Legislature to place advisory questions on the ballot, and City of Santa Monica v. Stewart (2005) 126 Cal.App.4th 43, upholding good government initiatives in Santa Monica and Pasadena.
Election Contests & Recounts
-
We have served as counsel to candidates and others involved in recounts in city and county elections, including the 2004 campaign of San Diego mayoral candidate Donna Frye, who ran as a write-in candidate in the general election. The recount led to litigation over the treatment of incompletely filled ballots bearing Frye’s name, which, if counted, would have resulted in her election.
-
From 2004 to 2009, we litigated issues relating to an electronic voting machine recount of a ballot measure election in the City of Berkeley, securing a published appellate decision establishing the relevance of audit logs, chain of custody documentation, redundant vote data, and other test results for electronic voting machines for use in a recount. (Americans for Safe Access v. County of Alameda (2009) 174 Cal.App.4th 1287.)
-
We successfully litigated an election contest on behalf of a candidate for Compton City Council who, according to official results, lost to an incumbent by a single vote in a general election. During the course of trial, we proved four votes were illegally cast in favor of the incumbent, resulting in a court order declaring our client the rightful winner of the election.
-
Also in the City of Compton, we represented the winner of the 2001 mayoral election in an election contest and subsequent appellate litigation, which focused largely on the propriety of the order of names on the ballot and resulted in a published appellate opinion reversing the trial court’s decision and reinstating our client as the winner of the election. (Bradley v. Perrodin (2003) 106 Cal.App.4th 1153.)
-
We successfully defended the declared winner of a race for Santa Barbara County Supervisor in an election contest concerning the validity of absentee ballots.
Other Election Litigation
We often represent individuals, candidates, committees, and other organizations in connection with a variety of other litigation matters that arise in relation to state and local elections. These matters include challenges to ballot language, candidate qualifications, and the right to recall.
-
We have successfully defended and prosecuted numerous challenges to ballot designations, ballot arguments, and candidate statements. (See, e.g., Cook v. Superior Court (2008) 161 Cal.App.4th 569.)
-
We represented then-candidate Barack Obama in litigation concerning his qualifications to hold the office of President and appear on the ballot in California, obtaining a published opinion upholding his appearance on the 2008 ballot. (Keyes v. Bowen (2010) 189 Cal.App.4th 647.)
-
We have litigated numerous cases concerning the application of term limits, resulting in published opinions in Pope v. Superior Court (2006) 136 Cal.App.4th 871 and Woo v. Superior Court (2000) 83 Cal.App.4th 967.
-
We have also litigated quo warranto actions in connection with challenges to an individual’s right to hold public office.
-
We have defended the right to recall a Superior Court judge against a legal challenge, resulting in a published opinion in Persky v. Bushey (2018) 21 Cal.App.5th 810.
Campaign Finance Compliance
We regularly counsel federal, state, and local campaign committees and candidates on complying with federal, state, and local campaign finance reporting and disclosure laws; in responding to complaints made to campaign finance regulatory agencies; and as campaign treasurers. We also frequently advise on issues relating to independent expenditure campaigns and political advocacy work by non-profit organizations.
