California Court Rules Sheriff Broke Law on Ballots

The California Supreme Court ruled unanimously Thursday that Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco broke state law when his deputies seized more than 650,000 ballots from the county's election office and ordered him to return them. In two separate decisions issued the same morning, the justices found the February raid unlawful, directed Bianco to end his investigation pending review by the Attorney General, and handed Attorney General Rob Bonta a sweeping affirmation of his authority to direct local sheriffs.

California Supreme Court Rules Sheriff Broke Law Seizing 650,000 Ballots

San Francisco, California — The ruling, filed September 24, 2026, closes a seven-month legal fight that began when armed deputies carted 12 pallets of ballots out of the Riverside County Registrar of Voters and into a storage facility accessible only to sheriff's department employees. The court's opinion, authored by Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero and signed by all seven justices, found Bianco violated his ministerial duty under the Elections Code and must return the ballots to the registrar.

Two Unanimous Rulings in One Morning

The Supreme Court decided two cases in tandem, both against Bianco. In Bonta v. Bianco, No. S295901, the court held that the Attorney General holds binding authority over sheriffs in a particular investigation, resolving a question it said it had never before addressed. In Cervantes et al. v. Bianco, No. S295866, brought by the UCLA Voting Rights Project, the court ordered the sheriff to return the ballots and to stop handling them. Both decisions were unanimous. Chief Justice Guerrero authored the opinion of the court, in which Justices Corrigan, Liu, Kruger, Groban, Evans and Burns concurred. Burns, an associate justice of the First Appellate District, Division Five, was assigned by the Chief Justice to sit on the case. The court had paused the investigation in April while it considered Bonta's challenge, then heard oral arguments on August 24 — 31 days before Thursday's ruling. Bonta told a morning news conference that "sanity, common sense, and importantly the rule of law have prevailed," calling the seizure "an unlawful attempt to undermine public confidence in our elections."

How 650,000 Ballots Left the Registrar's Office

The seizure followed a complaint from a community group called the Riverside Election Integrity Team, which alleged a discrepancy in vote totals from the November 4, 2025 special election on Proposition 50. REIT calculated from registrar records that 611,426 valid ballots had been cast countywide — 45,896 fewer than the 657,322 the registrar counted in his official tally. On February 6, 2026, a REIT representative contacted the sheriff's department. Three days later, the department obtained a search warrant authorizing seizure of all ballots pertaining to the 2025 special election. On February 23, it obtained a second warrant covering paper records of voted ballots, voter identification envelopes, spoiled and unused ballots, tally sheets and challenge lists. On February 26, deputies seized 12 pallets — approximately 1,000 boxes — and moved them to a secure facility. Wire services and court records describe the haul as roughly 650,000 ballots; the search warrants covered more than 656,000 ballots cast in the Proposition 50 election, the measure that redrew California's congressional map. It passed with 56.3 percent of the vote in Riverside County and 64 percent statewide, giving Democrats a shot at five more House seats.

The Warrant That Left Out What the Registrar Said

The February 23 affidavit referred again to the alleged vote discrepancy but did not mention the registrar's February 10 presentation to the Riverside County Board of Supervisors, in which he defended the official results and said the handwritten records REIT relied on were prone to human error and did not account for certain kinds of ballots. The affidavit stated instead that the registrar "has not given a reason for the discrepancy." Bonta's later letter to Bianco noted that the affidavit failed to inform the court of the registrar's explanations. Registrar Art Tinoco has said the group misread ballot data and that the actual gap was 103 votes, well within the margin of error set by California's secretary of state.

The Countdown He Moved Forward Instead of Back

On February 24, before either warrant had been executed, the Attorney General learned of their existence. A representative of Bonta's office asked Bianco for the affidavits, which Bianco emailed over, then called to ask that execution of the February 9 warrant be postponed from February 27 to March 6 to give the office time to understand the basis for the investigation. Instead, the sheriff advanced execution to February 26. Bonta sent a letter that same day noting the affidavits identified no specific felony offenses and no particular persons suspected of committing them, and directing Bianco to preserve all seized materials and pause further action. Bianco did not respond by the noon deadline the next day, or to subsequent attempts at contact over several days.

A Hand Count by Untrained Staff

On March 4, Bonta sent another letter saying he had learned the sheriff intended to ignore the directives and count the seized ballots using department staff members who were not trained and had no experience counting ballots. He called it unacceptable and asked Bianco to stand down. On March 5, sheriff's department employees began a hand count. That same day, Bianco emailed the Attorney General's office confirming receipt of the March 4 letter and stating the department was complying with the directive pending further communications. The count stopped, apparently at Bianco's direction. The ballots were returned to their boxes, resealed and left in the locked storage facility. On March 19, without notifying the Attorney General, the department obtained a third search warrant; its affidavit informed the court that counting had begun on March 5.

What the Justices Actually Wrote

Guerrero wrote for the court: "This is not a case involving a few documents. It involves the unlawful removal and handling by armed deputies of over 1,000 boxes of documents and not just any documents, but the most precious documents of the citizenry in a democracy: their votes." The court found that allowing law enforcement "unfettered access to ballots, or the ability to handle and count them in secret based on unregulated protocols, itself creates a substantial risk to election integrity." It held that Bianco violated his ministerial duty to carry out law enforcement responsibilities in compliance with the Elections Code, which requires ballots to remain in the registrar's custody. The court said the sheriff's arguments "all boil down to the unsustainable view that the state's chief law enforcement officer . . . nevertheless must remain a mere bystander to an unprecedented sheriff's investigation of undeniable statewide significance."

The Second Case, and Why It Matters More

In Cervantes et al. v. Bianco, the court called the seizure "unlawful," saying California law requires voted ballots to remain in the custody and control of election officials even during a criminal investigation. Bianco must also "refrain from further handling of the ballots except as necessary to comply with our order," the court said. The petitioners were Riverside County voters Clarissa Cervantes, Oscar Ortiz, Rebecca Robinson and Nathan Kempe, all of whom cast ballots in the November 2025 special election. The respondents were Bianco in his official capacity as sheriff and Tinoco in his official capacity as registrar. The court ordered Bianco to end the investigation pending review by Bonta. Justice Goodwin Liu, in a concurrence, wrote: "For our democracy to flourish, our elections must be conducted in accordance with the law," noting the seriousness of a violation implicating "the most precious documents of the citizenry in a democracy: their votes."

Sacramento Moved Before the Court Did

California Democratic leaders passed two new laws after Bianco's office seized the ballots, and Governor Gavin Newsom signed them last week. One makes it a felony to seize — or order the seizure of — ballots, election records or voting machines before election results are certified. The other expands on existing state election laws and makes it illegal to take election materials or voting machines from elections officials. State Sen. Sabrina Cervantes, D-Riverside, sponsored legislation signed by Newsom this year making it a crime to take marked ballots from elections officials. Newsom said the ruling affirms that California will defend democracy using every branch of government, adding: "The new laws I signed just last week add new protections so attacks like this cannot happen again."

Why This Is Bigger Than Riverside County

Bonta called the ballot seizure unprecedented in California history. The court noted it was the first time it had addressed a dispute between the Attorney General and a sheriff over the relationship created by the constitutional and statutory provisions at issue. Secretary of State Shirley Weber, in a brief, wrote that Bianco "violated (California election law's) clear mandate when he removed voted ballots from the custody of the Riverside County Registrar of Voters," and warned ballots could be irreversibly damaged if handled by untrained investigators. Election officials and civil rights groups have been following the case closely as they brace for the possibility that President Donald Trump or his allies may try to seize ballots in November. The Trump administration in January seized ballots and other documents from an election office in Georgia. CalMatters reported that Bianco acted at the urging of members of the "constitutional sheriff" movement and other local activists. Bonta framed the stakes in national terms, saying "with Trump, we're seeing unprecedented attacks on our election integrity," and that his office has planned for scenarios including the White House deploying federal troops or law enforcement to polling places. "Whether it's a sheriff in Riverside or the president of the United States, we won't let anyone take away Californians' voice in our democracy," he said. "Come November, we're ready for whatever comes our way." Election day is November 3, 40 days out.

What Bianco Says, and What Happens Next

Bradley Hertz, who represented Bianco before the court, argued the sheriff had a legal duty to open a criminal investigation after receiving a complaint and followed the penal code in first issuing search warrants in February. Hertz said Bianco has not returned the ballots because they are "evidence." Bianco rejected critics' concerns — his deputies knew how to count, he quipped — and said he had an obligation to investigate crimes in his county. In March he said: "What does sow mistrust in our system is failing to investigate, or worse, attempting to stop or interfere with a lawful investigation, to sweep it under the rug so evidence can possibly be destroyed." He did not immediately comment on the ruling. Bianco, who ran for governor as a Republican this year and did not advance from the June primary, has announced plans to run for reelection as sheriff in 2028. The ballots remained in the sheriff's custody as of Wednesday afternoon, according to Elizabeth Florer, spokesperson for Riverside County's elections office. In August, Bianco said his office would continue its investigation into the 2025 election no matter the court's ruling.

By Jessica Ali, Staff Writer

This article was produced with AI-assisted research and editorial support. Sources: Supreme Court of California (Bonta v. Bianco, No. S295901; Cervantes et al. v. Bianco, No. S295866), The Associated Press, Reuters, Politico, CalMatters, KPBS, The Press-Enterprise and the San Bernardino Sun, CBS Los Angeles, and The Washington Post.