The July 2019 Ridgecrest, California, earthquake sequence produced cross‐fault ruptures from a M_w6.4 left‐lateral foreshock and a M_w7.1 right‐lateral mainshock. We use interferometric synthetic aperture radar and satellite optical imagery to characterize the surface displacements and subsurface fault slip characteristics of the sequence. We document ~46 km of surface rupture and peak slip values of ~5 m associated with the M_w7.1 and evidence that the two ruptures crossed each other. We additionally document evidence of triggered creep along 20–25 km of the central Garlock fault. Static stress change analysis shows that the foreshock sequence systematically promoted slip at the M_w7.1 hypocenter. Moreover, we find static stress changes promoted slip on the Garlock fault only in locations where we document surface creep, strongly indicating that the Garlock fault is sensitive to static stress changes. A potential rupture of the Garlock fault where slip was promoted could produce a M_w6.7–7.0 earthquake.

The 2019 $Mw$ 6.4 and 7.1 Ridgecrest, California, earthquake sequence (July 2019) ruptured consecutively a system of high‐angle strike‐slip cross faults (northeast‐ and northwest‐trending) within 34 hr. The complex rupture mechanism was illuminated by seismological and geodetic data, bringing forward the issue of the interdependency of the two fault systems both at depth and at the surface, and of its effect on the final surface displacement pattern. Here, we use high‐resolution (WorldView and Pleiades) optical satellite image correlation to measure the near‐fault horizontal and vertical surface displacement fields at 0.5 m ground resolution for the two earthquakes. We point out significant differences with previous geodetic‐ and geologic‐based measurements, and document the essential role of distributed faulting and diffuse deformation in producing the observed surface displacement patterns. We derive strain fields from the horizontal displacement maps, and highlight the predominant role of rotation and shear strain in the surface rupture process. We discuss the segmentation of the rupture based on the fault geometry and along‐strike slip variations. We also image several northeast‐trending faults with similar orientation to the deeply embedded shear fabric identified in aftershock studies, and show that these cross faults are present all along the rupture, including at a scale <100 m. Finally, we compare our results to kinematic slip inversions, and show that the surface diffuse deformation is primarily associated with areas of shallow slip deficit; however, this diffuse deformation cannot be explained using elastic modeling. We conclude that inelastic processes play an important role in contributing to the total surface deformation associated with the 2019 Ridgecrest sequence.