Full Breakdown
California Supreme Court Bars Sheriff’s Unlawful Ballot Seizure
By Drooid · · How we work
Core Event: Court Orders Return of Seized Ballots
In late September 2026 the California Supreme Court issued unanimous opinions declaring that Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco’s seizure of roughly 650,000 ballots from the November 2025 special election on Proposition 50 was unlawful. The court ordered the ballots returned immediately to the Riverside County Registrar of Voters and barred the sheriff from further handling of the materials except as required to comply with the order.
Background & Context
Proposition 50, a congressional-redistricting measure backed by Governor Gavin Newsom, passed statewide in the November 2025 special election and won Riverside County by about 80,000 votes. A pilot hand-tally program reported a discrepancy of roughly 46,000 votes, prompting activists to allege fraud. Sheriff Bianco obtained search warrants in February 2026 and dispatched deputies, including SWAT units, to seize more than 1,000 boxes of ballots and begin a hand recount—an activity reserved for election officials. Attorney General Rob Bonta sued, asserting the sheriff lacked authority, and the UCLA Voting Rights Project filed a parallel suit on behalf of county voters.
Data & Statistics
- Ballots seized: about 650,000 (court figure)
- Boxes seized: over 1,000
- Pilot-tally shortfall: ~46,000 votes
- Proposition 50 margin in Riverside County: ~80,000 votes in favor
Official Statements & Responses
Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero said the seizure violated the Elections Code, which requires ballots to remain under election officials’ custody even during criminal investigations. Associate Justice Goodwin H. Liu called the sheriff’s actions “unprecedented” and noted that specific election provisions “trump the general.” Attorney General Bonta hailed the decision as a safeguard of the attorney general’s authority to intervene when sheriffs act improperly. UCLA Voting Rights Project legal director Chad Dunn called the ruling “important clarity” for election officials and voters.
Criticism & Opposition
Chad W. Dunn warned that similar attempts could recur, citing the broader “constitutional sheriffs” movement that encourages local law-enforcement officials to act independently of state oversight.
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
Sources differ on the seizure’s scale: the Los Angeles Times cites “more than half a million” ballots, the New York Times mentions “over 1,000 boxes of documents,” while the Associated Press and US News report “about 650,000” ballots. No source provides a final count of how many ballots have been returned, leaving the completion of the court-ordered restitution unclear.
Verbatim Quotes
- “We hold that the seizure of the ballots was unlawful,” — Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero
- “A criminal prosecution commences only upon the occurrence of certain events — none of which has occurred in this case — and may only be initiated by a public prosecutor,” — Justice Patricia Guerrero
- “The Court has now made clear that this kind of defiance cannot stand,” — Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta
- “You are walking into a very dense thicket of very specific laws that govern elections in particular and I think it’s a very established cannon of interpretation that the specific trumps the general,” — Associate Justice Goodwin H. Liu
What’s Next
The decision arrives weeks before the November 3 midterm elections, for which state officials have urged early voting. Governor Newsom has signed legislation explicitly barring any local official from seizing ballots. Sheriff Bianco, who did not advance in the 2026 gubernatorial primary, has announced a bid for re-election as sheriff in 2028, suggesting the issue may reappear in future legal contests.