Republican California sheriff’s seizure of 650,000 votes ruled ‘illegal’ — What the court said | Today’s news
The California Supreme Court on Thursday (Sept. 24) ordered Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco to return roughly 650,000 ballots seized as part of an investigation into alleged voting irregularities in the November 2025 special election, ruling that the seizure was illegal under state election law.
The unanimous ruling says that ballots cast must remain in the custody and control of election officials even as law enforcement investigates suspected election malpractice. The court also ordered Bianco to refrain from further tampering with ballots except as necessary to carry out his order.
Why did Chad Bianco seize the ballots?
Bianco’s department confiscated approximately 650,000 ballots cast in Riverside County during the Nov. 4, 2025, special election on Proposition 50, the congressional measure endorsed by Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom.
The sheriff launched an investigation after a local citizens group claimed there was a discrepancy between the official vote tally and her own calculations. Election officials denied the allegations.
In the Supreme Court’s opinion, sheriff’s officials obtained two search warrants in February 2026 that authorized the seizure of ballots and other election-related materials from the county registrar.
Bianco later began recounting the ballots under the supervision of a court-appointed special master, but suspended that effort amid legal disputes.
Court says election law protects safekeeping of ballots
The Supreme Court rejected an argument that the search warrants allowed Bianco’s office to keep the ballots as evidence.
The justices said California’s election code provides procedures for investigating allegations of election misconduct without compromising the integrity and security of ballots cast.
“While allegations of election impropriety are a very serious matter,” the court said, the election code provides mechanisms for investigating and proving misconduct that will not jeopardize the ballots cast.
The court therefore issued an order directing Bianco to return the ballots to the Riverside County Registrar.
Attorney General Bonta contested the seizure
California Attorney General Rob Bonta separately challenged Bianco’s actions, arguing that the sheriff lacked the authority to take control of election materials.
Bonta ordered Bianco to return the ballots, but the sheriff did not comply, leading to further litigation. The state Supreme Court heard Bont’s case along with a lawsuit filed by Riverside County voters.
Thursday’s court decision also dealt with the relationship between state power and the regional police. A separate case, Bonta v. Bianco, involved the attorney general’s constitutional and statutory authority to supervise and direct the county sheriff.
Bianco’s defense
Bianco’s attorney, Bradley Hertz, argued that the sheriff had a legal duty to investigate after receiving a complaint and followed criminal code by obtaining search warrants.
Hertz argued that Bianco did not return the ballots because they constituted evidence in an ongoing criminal investigation.
However, the Supreme Court ruled that warrants do not override California election law requirements governing safekeeping of cast ballots.
The dispute drew national attention as it unfolded amid ongoing political debate over election security and allegations of voting irregularities.
Bianco, a Republican, was running for governor of California when he grabbed the ballots. He did not advance from the primary and later announced plans to seek re-election as Riverside County Sheriff in 2028.
