Was Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco's seizure of about 650,000 ballots lawful?
Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco seized about 650,000 ballots in early 2026 under search warrants, citing a disputed vote discrepancy. The California Supreme Court held the seizure unlawful; Bianco says his investigation was lawful and disagrees with the ruling.
Claim in dispute
The Riverside County Sheriff's Office lawfully seized the county's Proposition 50 ballots and other election materials under search warrants issued by a judge, because Elections Code section 15551(d) can be read to permit a seizure under a valid judicial warrant.
Case period:
Published by The Dispute Index editorial teamPublished Updated
Overview
The fixed reference point for classification in this case is Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco's seizure and handling of about 650,000 ballots taken from the county registrar of voters on February 26, 2026, and the further election materials taken on March 24, including the count his department's staff began and his continuing the investigation after Attorney General Rob Bonta directed him to pause. A statement that says the seizure or handling was unlawful or wrong is recorded as condemning it; a statement that says it was lawful or justified is recorded as defending it. Responses are recorded against that specific matter, not against the result of the Proposition 50 election, the broader debate over election fraud, or the sheriff's earlier election inquiries.
Voters approved Proposition 50 on November 4, 2025, and 56.3 percent of Riverside County votes were in favor (Bonta v. Bianco (opens in a new tab)). In February 2026 a citizens' group, the Riverside Election Integrity Team, told the sheriff's department that its analysis of handwritten intake records showed 45,896 fewer ballots than the 657,322 the registrar counted. On February 10, Registrar Art Tinoco told the Board of Supervisors that the group had relied on preliminary records and that the variance between his two ballot-tracking systems was 103 ballots, or 0.016 percent (Cervantes v. Bianco, Justice Liu concurring (opens in a new tab)). The court said that discrepancy is disputed, that it was not asked to resolve it, and that everyone agrees the claimed gap could not have changed the election's outcome.
The sheriff's department obtained search warrants on February 9, February 23 and March 19. It executed the first on February 26, taking about 1,000 boxes of ballots a day ahead of the planned February 27 date, after the Attorney General's office had asked for a postponement, and executed the second on March 24.
Bonta directed Bianco on February 26 to preserve the materials and pause the investigation. Sheriff's department staff began hand-counting the ballots on March 5 and stopped, and Bianco said at a March 20 news conference that the investigation would continue (Press-Enterprise (opens in a new tab)). Bonta petitioned the courts on March 23, and the UCLA Voting Rights Project, for four county voters, petitioned the California Supreme Court on March 25. On April 8 the Supreme Court ordered the investigation paused and the seized items preserved (Press-Enterprise (opens in a new tab)).
On September 24, 2026, the court unanimously held that the seizure was unlawful because Elections Code section 15551(d) says voted ballots shall "[i]n no event" be taken from the elections official's custody, and ordered Bianco to return the ballots to the registrar (Cervantes v. Bianco (opens in a new tab)). In a companion ruling it held that the Attorney General's constitutional and statutory authority includes binding directions to a sheriff about a particular investigation, and ordered Bianco to comply with them (Bonta v. Bianco (opens in a new tab)). The court denied the rest of the petition without prejudice, saying petitioners had not shown a duty to return non-ballot materials and that the parties had not briefed the effect of Senate Bill 1418, signed September 19.
Bianco and the California State Sheriffs' Association argue the investigation rested on warrants issued by a judge and that the Attorney General cannot halt a sheriff's lawful investigation. Bonta argues the warrants rested on affidavits that did not establish probable cause, and Bonta, Secretary of State Shirley Weber and the petitioning voters argue that state law requires ballots to stay with the registrar. Bianco told supporters after the ruling that he will obey the writs (Politico (opens in a new tab)).
People in this case
Chad BiancoDirectly involved
Rob BontaDirectly involved
Shirley WeberDirectly involved
Steve HiltonCommented
Timeline
14 timeline entries on this page. Dates: February 6, 2026 to September 24, 2026
February 2026
4 events
Citizens' group reports a 45,896-ballot discrepancy to the sheriff's department
Claim
On February 6, 2026, a representative of the Riverside Election Integrity Team contacted the Riverside County Sheriff's Department to report the group's calculation, from Registrar of Voters records, that 611,426 valid ballots were cast in the November 4, 2025 special election on Proposition 50, which was 45,896 fewer than the 657,322 the registrar counted. The California Supreme Court later described the discrepancy as disputed.
[01]Bonta v. Bianco (S295901), opinion of the Court
Source excerpt
the language of article V, section 13 plainly confers upon the Attorney General the authority to issue binding directions to a sheriff regarding a criminal investigation.
The California Supreme Court's unanimous opinion on the Attorney General's petition. It holds that the Attorney General may give a sheriff binding directions about a criminal investigation, that his directions to Sheriff Bianco were lawful, and orders compliance. Part I also gives the court's dated account of the warrants, the seizure and the exchanges between the Attorney General and the sheriff.
Bonta v. Bianco (S295901), opinion of the Court · Supreme Court of CaliforniaOpinion of the Court, Part I (background), Part II.A.2 (application), Part III (conclusion)[02]Cervantes v. Bianco (S295866), opinion of the Court and concurring opinion of Justice Liu
Source excerpt
We hold that the seizure of the ballots was unlawful.
The California Supreme Court's unanimous opinion on the voters' petition. It holds that Sheriff Bianco's seizure of the ballots violated Elections Code section 15551(d), orders the ballots returned to the Riverside County Registrar of Voters, and summarizes the facts and the warrants.
Cervantes v. Bianco (S295866), opinion of the Court and concurring opinion of Justice Liu · Supreme Court of CaliforniaOpinion of the Court, pp. 1-2, 6 (holding), 25-26; Liu, J., concurringSheriff's department obtains a sealed warrant for all ballots from the special election
Incident
On February 9, the sheriff's department obtained from the Riverside County Superior Court a search warrant authorizing the seizure from the registrar of all ballots pertaining to the 2025 special election. The supporting affidavit described the alleged discrepancy and said the ballots were necessary "to prove or disprove any criminal conduct." The warrants were later reported to have been signed by Judge Jay Kiel, whom Bianco had endorsed in 2022; Bianco said it was coincidence that Kiel was the duty judge that day.
[01]Bonta v. Bianco (S295901), opinion of the Court
Source excerpt
the language of article V, section 13 plainly confers upon the Attorney General the authority to issue binding directions to a sheriff regarding a criminal investigation.
The California Supreme Court's unanimous opinion on the Attorney General's petition. It holds that the Attorney General may give a sheriff binding directions about a criminal investigation, that his directions to Sheriff Bianco were lawful, and orders compliance. Part I also gives the court's dated account of the warrants, the seizure and the exchanges between the Attorney General and the sheriff.
Bonta v. Bianco (S295901), opinion of the Court · Supreme Court of CaliforniaOpinion of the Court, Part I (background), Part II.A.2 (application), Part III (conclusion)[03]Warrants that seized 650,000-plus Riverside County ballots are flawed, experts say
Source excerpt
On Wednesday, April 8, the California Supreme Court ordered a pause in the probe until it further reviews the investigation
Press-Enterprise report on the unsealed warrants, the California Supreme Court's April 8 order pausing the investigation, and reactions from legal scholars and Sheriff Bianco.
Warrants that seized 650,000-plus Riverside County ballots are flawed, experts say · The Press-EnterpriseReport on the unsealed warrants and the April 8 Supreme Court order[04]Chad Bianco defends getting warrant from judge who praised him
Source excerpt
“It’s impossible to know who the duty judge is on that day,” he said in an interview Thursday
CalMatters report on Sheriff Bianco's March 26 interview, the three warrants signed by Riverside Superior Court Judge Jay Kiel, whom Bianco endorsed in 2022, and the sealing of the warrants.
Chad Bianco defends getting warrant from judge who praised him · CalMattersReport on Bianco's interview and the warrant judgeRegistrar tells the Board of Supervisors the reported discrepancy reflects misread records
Claim
At a public meeting of the Riverside County Board of Supervisors, Registrar of Voters Art Tinoco presented data from the county's two ballot-tracking systems showing 657,219 ballots cast and 657,322 counted, a variance of 103 ballots, or 0.016 percent. He said the citizens' group's figure relied on preliminary, handwritten records that did not account for some categories of ballots. Members of the group spoke afterward and said the handwritten records were accurate and reliable, and sheriff's department personnel attended the meeting.
[02]Cervantes v. Bianco (S295866), opinion of the Court and concurring opinion of Justice Liu
Source excerpt
We hold that the seizure of the ballots was unlawful.
The California Supreme Court's unanimous opinion on the voters' petition. It holds that Sheriff Bianco's seizure of the ballots violated Elections Code section 15551(d), orders the ballots returned to the Riverside County Registrar of Voters, and summarizes the facts and the warrants.
Cervantes v. Bianco (S295866), opinion of the Court and concurring opinion of Justice Liu · Supreme Court of CaliforniaOpinion of the Court, pp. 1-2, 6 (holding), 25-26; Liu, J., concurring[05]Respondent Riverside County Registrar of Voters' Return by Answer to Petition for Writ of Mandate (Cervantes v. Bianco, S295866)
Source excerpt
Respondent therefore does not oppose the relief requested in the Petition
The Registrar of Voters' return in the California Supreme Court, verified by Art Tinoco. It states his position on ballot custody, on his own compliance with the warrants, and on the voters' request that the ballots be returned.
Respondent Riverside County Registrar of Voters' Return by Answer to Petition for Writ of Mandate (Cervantes v. Bianco, S295866) · Supreme Court of CaliforniaIntroduction; Memorandum of Points and Authorities, Part I, p. 26[06]Alleged irregularities in elections probed by Riverside County Sheriff's Office
Source excerpt
“conducting an investigation into alleged irregularities in our elections.”
Press-Enterprise report in which the Sheriff's Office confirmed the investigation and Registrar Art Tinoco's February 10 explanation to the Board of Supervisors was described.
Alleged irregularities in elections probed by Riverside County Sheriff's Office · The Press-EnterpriseReport on the sheriff's office statement and the Registrar's Feb. 10 presentationSheriff's department seizes about 1,000 boxes of ballots; Attorney General directs a pause
Incident
After a representative of the Attorney General's office asked on February 24 that execution of the February 9 warrant be postponed from February 27 to March 6, the sheriff's department executed it on February 26 and seized 12 pallets, about 1,000 boxes, of ballots, which were taken to a storage facility accessible only to sheriff's department employees. Later that day Attorney General Rob Bonta wrote to Bianco directing him to preserve everything seized and pause further action until the Attorney General's office could review the matter, and said the affidavits identified no specific felony offenses the sheriff had probable cause to believe were committed.
[01]Bonta v. Bianco (S295901), opinion of the Court
Source excerpt
the language of article V, section 13 plainly confers upon the Attorney General the authority to issue binding directions to a sheriff regarding a criminal investigation.
The California Supreme Court's unanimous opinion on the Attorney General's petition. It holds that the Attorney General may give a sheriff binding directions about a criminal investigation, that his directions to Sheriff Bianco were lawful, and orders compliance. Part I also gives the court's dated account of the warrants, the seizure and the exchanges between the Attorney General and the sheriff.
Bonta v. Bianco (S295901), opinion of the Court · Supreme Court of CaliforniaOpinion of the Court, Part I (background), Part II.A.2 (application), Part III (conclusion)
March 2026
5 events
Sheriff's department staff begin a hand count of the ballots and then stop
Incident
On March 4 the Attorney General wrote that he had learned the sheriff intended to ignore his directives and have untrained department staff count the seized ballots. On March 5 sheriff's department employees began a hand count. That day Bianco emailed the Attorney General's office that the department was complying with the directive pending further communications, and the count stopped; the ballots were returned to their boxes and resealed.
[01]Bonta v. Bianco (S295901), opinion of the Court
Source excerpt
the language of article V, section 13 plainly confers upon the Attorney General the authority to issue binding directions to a sheriff regarding a criminal investigation.
The California Supreme Court's unanimous opinion on the Attorney General's petition. It holds that the Attorney General may give a sheriff binding directions about a criminal investigation, that his directions to Sheriff Bianco were lawful, and orders compliance. Part I also gives the court's dated account of the warrants, the seizure and the exchanges between the Attorney General and the sheriff.
Bonta v. Bianco (S295901), opinion of the Court · Supreme Court of CaliforniaOpinion of the Court, Part I (background), Part II.A.2 (application), Part III (conclusion)Sheriff's department obtains a third warrant and asks for a special master
Incident
Without notifying the Attorney General, the sheriff's department obtained a third search warrant. Its affidavit said counting had begun on March 5 and that the Attorney General had sent letters that directed or requested a pause, and asked for a special master to oversee counting the ballots "in an effort to avoid any potential appearance of impropriety." The court issued the warrant but did not appoint a special master.
[01]Bonta v. Bianco (S295901), opinion of the Court
Source excerpt
the language of article V, section 13 plainly confers upon the Attorney General the authority to issue binding directions to a sheriff regarding a criminal investigation.
The California Supreme Court's unanimous opinion on the Attorney General's petition. It holds that the Attorney General may give a sheriff binding directions about a criminal investigation, that his directions to Sheriff Bianco were lawful, and orders compliance. Part I also gives the court's dated account of the warrants, the seizure and the exchanges between the Attorney General and the sheriff.
Bonta v. Bianco (S295901), opinion of the Court · Supreme Court of CaliforniaOpinion of the Court, Part I (background), Part II.A.2 (application), Part III (conclusion)Bianco describes the investigation at a news conference; Bonta and Weber respond
Claim
At a news conference at sheriff's headquarters, Sheriff Bianco said the investigation would determine whether the alleged 45,000-vote discrepancy was valid by physically counting the ballots and would continue despite the Attorney General's attempts to stop it. Attorney General Bonta's office said the investigation appeared not to be based on facts or evidence, and Secretary of State Shirley Weber said the sheriff's office had acted on allegations that lack credible evidence. The sheriff's office had confirmed the investigation in a statement reported on March 17.
[07]Election Fraud Investigation Press Conference (Riverside County Sheriff's Office, March 20, 2026)
Source excerpt
This investigation is simple. Physically count the ballots and compare that result with the total votes reported.
Video of the March 20, 2026 news conference at which Sheriff Bianco publicly described the ballot investigation, said a court had ordered a special master, and responded to the Attorney General's directives to halt it.
Election Fraud Investigation Press Conference (Riverside County Sheriff's Office, March 20, 2026) · Riverside County Sheriff's OfficeStatement at 02:41-02:57, 03:20-03:45 and 04:04-04:11[08]Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco defends seizure of 656,000 ballots
Source excerpt
“There is no legal justification for the attorney general to stop a lawful investigation,” he said
Press-Enterprise report on the March 20 news conference, with responses from Attorney General Bonta's office and Secretary of State Weber.
Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco defends seizure of 656,000 ballots · The Press-EnterpriseReport on the March 20 news conference; statements by Bonta and Weber[09]California Secretary of State Shirley N. Weber, Ph.D., Sets the Record Straight about Accusations of Election Irregularities and Investigation Interference in Riverside County
Source excerpt
The Riverside County Sheriff’s Office has taken actions based on allegations that lack credible evidence and risk undermining public confidence in our elections.
Secretary of State Shirley Weber's press release responding to the Sheriff's March 20 news conference.
California Secretary of State Shirley N. Weber, Ph.D., Sets the Record Straight about Accusations of Election Irregularities and Investigation Interference in Riverside County · Shirley WeberPress release PR26-33, March 20, 2026[06]Alleged irregularities in elections probed by Riverside County Sheriff's Office
Source excerpt
“conducting an investigation into alleged irregularities in our elections.”
Press-Enterprise report in which the Sheriff's Office confirmed the investigation and Registrar Art Tinoco's February 10 explanation to the Board of Supervisors was described.
Alleged irregularities in elections probed by Riverside County Sheriff's Office · The Press-EnterpriseReport on the sheriff's office statement and the Registrar's Feb. 10 presentationCourt of Appeal declines the Attorney General's petition; second warrant executed
Incident
The Attorney General filed a petition in the Court of Appeal on March 23. The court denied it on March 24, saying he had not shown he lacked an adequate remedy in the Riverside County Superior Court. On March 24 the sheriff's department executed the February 23 warrant and seized another 11 pallets of election materials from the registrar.
[01]Bonta v. Bianco (S295901), opinion of the Court
Source excerpt
the language of article V, section 13 plainly confers upon the Attorney General the authority to issue binding directions to a sheriff regarding a criminal investigation.
The California Supreme Court's unanimous opinion on the Attorney General's petition. It holds that the Attorney General may give a sheriff binding directions about a criminal investigation, that his directions to Sheriff Bianco were lawful, and orders compliance. Part I also gives the court's dated account of the warrants, the seizure and the exchanges between the Attorney General and the sheriff.
Bonta v. Bianco (S295901), opinion of the Court · Supreme Court of CaliforniaOpinion of the Court, Part I (background), Part II.A.2 (application), Part III (conclusion)[10]Court denies California's bid to halt Riverside sheriff's recount of 2025 election ballots
Source excerpt
Bonta’s lawsuit in the 4th District Court of Appeal, filed Monday
CalMatters report on the Attorney General's petition in the Court of Appeal, filed March 23 and denied March 24, and on the sheriff's response.
Court denies California's bid to halt Riverside sheriff's recount of 2025 election ballots · CalMattersReport on the Court of Appeal's denial of the Attorney General's petitionRiverside County voters petition the California Supreme Court for the ballots' return
On March 25, the UCLA Voting Rights Project filed a petition in the California Supreme Court for four Riverside County voters, asking it to order the sheriff to return the seized ballots and election materials to the registrar. On March 26 Bianco filed a sworn declaration saying the department would not do any counting and had paused its investigation pending the writ proceeding in the Attorney General's case, and on March 30 he said the investigation was "on hold."
[11]California Supreme Court Hears Challenge to Sheriff Chad Bianco's Seizure of More Than 650,000 Riverside County Ballots
Source excerpt
“A criminal investigation is not a blanket license to ignore California election laws,” said Sonni Waknin
Press release from the UCLA Voting Rights Project, which represents four Riverside County voters, on the August 24 oral argument in Cervantes v. Bianco.
California Supreme Court Hears Challenge to Sheriff Chad Bianco's Seizure of More Than 650,000 Riverside County Ballots · UCLA Voting Rights ProjectPress release dated August 24, 2026[12]Declaration of Sheriff Chad Bianco in Support of Respondents' Preliminary Opposition (Cervantes v. Bianco, S295866)
Source excerpt
RSO will not do any counting and has paused its investigation pending the resolution of the writ of mandate.
Sheriff Bianco's sworn declaration filed in the California Supreme Court, describing the warrants, the basis for the investigation and the pause in counting.
Declaration of Sheriff Chad Bianco in Support of Respondents' Preliminary Opposition (Cervantes v. Bianco, S295866) · Supreme Court of CaliforniaDeclaration, paragraphs 3-16, executed March 26, 2026[13]Why CA Sheriff Chad Bianco seized ballots while running for governor
Source excerpt
“It’s very refreshing to see local law enforcement take action on these types of issues,” Dhillon said on Newsmax March 28.
USA TODAY report that quotes Harmeet Dhillon's March 28 Newsmax remarks about Sheriff Bianco's seizure, and Bianco's March 31 interview with the newspaper.
Why CA Sheriff Chad Bianco seized ballots while running for governor · USA TodaySection 'Revisiting elections in Georgia and Arizona, too'
14 days between recorded events
April 2026
2 events
California Supreme Court orders the investigation paused and the seized items preserved
On April 8, the California Supreme Court ordered Bianco and his office to pause the investigation into the November 2025 special election and preserve all seized items while it reviewed the Attorney General's petition. The three search warrants were also made public that day.
[14]California Supreme Court orders GOP sheriff to pause election probe and preserve seized ballots
Source excerpt
Bianco and his office "are hereby ordered to pause the investigation into the November 2025 special election and preserve all seized items," the order reads.
Associated Press report, carried by PBS News, on the California Supreme Court's April 8 order in the Attorney General's case.
California Supreme Court orders GOP sheriff to pause election probe and preserve seized ballots · Associated PressReport on the April 8 order[03]Warrants that seized 650,000-plus Riverside County ballots are flawed, experts say
Source excerpt
On Wednesday, April 8, the California Supreme Court ordered a pause in the probe until it further reviews the investigation
Press-Enterprise report on the unsealed warrants, the California Supreme Court's April 8 order pausing the investigation, and reactions from legal scholars and Sheriff Bianco.
Warrants that seized 650,000-plus Riverside County ballots are flawed, experts say · The Press-EnterpriseReport on the unsealed warrants and the April 8 Supreme Court order[15]Just Released Riverside County Warrants Relied on Bogus Evidence of Likely Felony to Seize Ballots; Links to Warrants
Source excerpt
One of the claims made is that ballots were about to be destroyed.
Election law scholar Rick Hasen's post on the day the three Riverside County search warrants were made public, with links to the warrants.
Just Released Riverside County Warrants Relied on Bogus Evidence of Likely Felony to Seize Ballots; Links to Warrants · Rick HasenElection Law Blog post published 2026-04-08 23:15 UTCBoard of Supervisors votes not to pay for outside counsel for the sheriff
On April 14, the Riverside County Board of Supervisors voted not to authorize the hiring or payment of outside counsel to defend the sheriff in the lawsuits arising from his election investigation, according to Justice Goodwin Liu's concurring opinion in Cervantes v. Bianco.
[02]Cervantes v. Bianco (S295866), opinion of the Court and concurring opinion of Justice Liu
Source excerpt
We hold that the seizure of the ballots was unlawful.
The California Supreme Court's unanimous opinion on the voters' petition. It holds that Sheriff Bianco's seizure of the ballots violated Elections Code section 15551(d), orders the ballots returned to the Riverside County Registrar of Voters, and summarizes the facts and the warrants.
Cervantes v. Bianco (S295866), opinion of the Court and concurring opinion of Justice Liu · Supreme Court of CaliforniaOpinion of the Court, pp. 1-2, 6 (holding), 25-26; Liu, J., concurring
132 days between recorded events
August 2026
1 event
California Supreme Court hears argument in both cases
The California Supreme Court heard oral argument in Cervantes v. Bianco and Bonta v. Bianco in a 95-minute session, hearing from counsel for the voters, the Attorney General as amicus curiae, the Secretary of State, Sheriff Bianco and the Registrar of Voters. It did not rule that day.
[11]California Supreme Court Hears Challenge to Sheriff Chad Bianco's Seizure of More Than 650,000 Riverside County Ballots
Source excerpt
“A criminal investigation is not a blanket license to ignore California election laws,” said Sonni Waknin
Press release from the UCLA Voting Rights Project, which represents four Riverside County voters, on the August 24 oral argument in Cervantes v. Bianco.
California Supreme Court Hears Challenge to Sheriff Chad Bianco's Seizure of More Than 650,000 Riverside County Ballots · UCLA Voting Rights ProjectPress release dated August 24, 2026
26 days between recorded events
September 2026
2 events
Governor signs Senate Bill 1418 and related election-protection bills
On September 19, Governor Gavin Newsom signed Senate Bill 1418, which broadened the Elections Code provision barring the removal of election materials from an elections official's custody. Related bills, including Assembly Bill 282 on criminal liability for seizing ballots before certification, were signed in the days before the ruling, following Senate Bill 73 earlier in 2026. The California Supreme Court discussed Senate Bill 1418 in its ruling.
[02]Cervantes v. Bianco (S295866), opinion of the Court and concurring opinion of Justice Liu
Source excerpt
We hold that the seizure of the ballots was unlawful.
The California Supreme Court's unanimous opinion on the voters' petition. It holds that Sheriff Bianco's seizure of the ballots violated Elections Code section 15551(d), orders the ballots returned to the Riverside County Registrar of Voters, and summarizes the facts and the warrants.
Cervantes v. Bianco (S295866), opinion of the Court and concurring opinion of Justice Liu · Supreme Court of CaliforniaOpinion of the Court, pp. 1-2, 6 (holding), 25-26; Liu, J., concurringCalifornia Supreme Court rules the seizure unlawful and upholds the Attorney General's directives
Source release
In Cervantes v. Bianco the California Supreme Court unanimously held that the seizure of the ballots was unlawful under Elections Code section 15551(d) and issued a writ directing Bianco to return all packages containing voted ballots to the registrar and refrain from further handling them. In Bonta v. Bianco it unanimously held that the Attorney General may give a sheriff binding directions about a criminal investigation and issued a writ directing Bianco to comply with his instructions to take no further action on the investigation, retain seized records and provide requested materials.
[02]Cervantes v. Bianco (S295866), opinion of the Court and concurring opinion of Justice Liu
Source excerpt
We hold that the seizure of the ballots was unlawful.
The California Supreme Court's unanimous opinion on the voters' petition. It holds that Sheriff Bianco's seizure of the ballots violated Elections Code section 15551(d), orders the ballots returned to the Riverside County Registrar of Voters, and summarizes the facts and the warrants.
Cervantes v. Bianco (S295866), opinion of the Court and concurring opinion of Justice Liu · Supreme Court of CaliforniaOpinion of the Court, pp. 1-2, 6 (holding), 25-26; Liu, J., concurring[01]Bonta v. Bianco (S295901), opinion of the Court
Source excerpt
the language of article V, section 13 plainly confers upon the Attorney General the authority to issue binding directions to a sheriff regarding a criminal investigation.
The California Supreme Court's unanimous opinion on the Attorney General's petition. It holds that the Attorney General may give a sheriff binding directions about a criminal investigation, that his directions to Sheriff Bianco were lawful, and orders compliance. Part I also gives the court's dated account of the warrants, the seizure and the exchanges between the Attorney General and the sheriff.
Bonta v. Bianco (S295901), opinion of the Court · Supreme Court of CaliforniaOpinion of the Court, Part I (background), Part II.A.2 (application), Part III (conclusion)[16]Sheriff broke law by seizing ballots, CA Supreme Court rules
Source excerpt
“We are very disappointed and wholeheartedly disagree with the court’s ruling,”
CalMatters report on the California Supreme Court's two rulings, quoting Sheriff Bianco's written statement, Attorney General Bonta's news conference remarks, and the court's opinions.
Sheriff broke law by seizing ballots, CA Supreme Court rules · CalMattersReport on the rulings; Bianco's written statement[17]California Supreme Court rules against Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco in ballot seizure fight
Source excerpt
Bianco said in a telephone interview Thursday he was “extremely disappointed” with the Supreme Court’s decision.
Press-Enterprise report on the rulings with statements from Bianco, Bonta, Newsom and petitioner Clarissa Cervantes.
California Supreme Court rules against Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco in ballot seizure fight · The Press-EnterpriseReport on the rulings, including Bianco's telephone interview
Claims
Claims separate what was said from what is contested. Follow each source for the original wording and context.
What's disputed
Disputed claim
The Riverside County Sheriff's Office lawfully seized the county's Proposition 50 ballots and other election materials under search warrants issued by a judge, because Elections Code section 15551(d) can be read to permit a seizure under a valid judicial warrant.
Sources (2)
- Declaration of Sheriff Chad Bianco in Support of Respondents' Preliminary Opposition (Cervantes v. Bianco, S295866) · Supreme Court of CaliforniaDeclaration, paragraphs 3-16, executed March 26, 2026
- Respondents' Return to Order to Show Cause; Opposition to Petition for Writ of Mandate (Cervantes v. Bianco, S295866) · Supreme Court of CaliforniaIntroduction and Summary of Argument, pp. 8-10
Disputed claim
The Attorney General has no legal authority to order a sheriff to halt or pause a lawful criminal investigation.
Sources (2)
- Election Fraud Investigation Press Conference (Riverside County Sheriff's Office, March 20, 2026) · Riverside County Sheriff's OfficeStatement at 02:41-02:57, 03:20-03:45 and 04:04-04:11
- Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco defends seizure of 656,000 ballots · The Press-EnterpriseReport on the March 20 news conference; statements by Bonta and Weber
Disputed claim
Elections Code section 15551(d) requires that voted ballots never be taken from the elections official's custody, so Sheriff Bianco violated it when he removed the Riverside County ballots from the Registrar of Voters, even under a search warrant.
Sources (2)
- Brief of Real Party in Interest California Secretary of State Dr. Shirley N. Weber Concerning the Relief Requested in the Petition (Cervantes v. Bianco, S295866) · Supreme Court of CaliforniaIntroduction, p. 5; Argument I, p. 7
- Cervantes v. Bianco (S295866), opinion of the Court and concurring opinion of Justice Liu · Supreme Court of CaliforniaOpinion of the Court, pp. 1-2, 6 (holding), 25-26; Liu, J., concurring
Disputed claim
The Attorney General's constitutional and statutory supervisory authority over sheriffs includes the power to give binding directions about a criminal investigation, including to preserve seized items and pause the investigation, and Sheriff Bianco was required to comply.
Sources (2)
- Bonta v. Bianco (S295901), opinion of the Court · Supreme Court of CaliforniaOpinion of the Court, Part I (background), Part II.A.2 (application), Part III (conclusion)
- Attorney General Bonta Secures Major Victories from State's Highest Court, Confirming Authority to Issue Binding Directives to Riverside Sheriff and Ordering Sheriff to Return Voted Ballots to the Registrar of Voters · Rob BontaPress release, statement of Attorney General Rob Bonta
Response record
Responses
Latest recorded positions: 15. Dates: March 20, 2026 to September 24, 2026
Choose one response filter, or select All responses to see the full record.
1 response on this page
Steve Hilton"I'm not going to weigh in on something that I don't have the knowledge of the facts on. I trust that Chad is interested in what we should all be interested in, which is ensuring the integrity of our elections and restoring faith in our elections in California."
Read the original text (opens in a new tab)The California Governor Primary Debate (CNN transcript, May 5, 2026, 10-11p ET) · CNNTranscript, exchange beginning with the moderator's question to Xavier Becerra about the lawsuit against Sheriff Bianco (about 22:08-22:11 ET)Explicitly stayed outCase context: Was Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco's seizure of about 650,000 ballots lawful?
Read more
Asked whether Sheriff Bianco took the right step in seizing the ballots, Steve Hilton said he was "not going to weigh in" because he did not have knowledge of the facts, and added that he trusted Bianco was interested in ensuring the integrity of elections.
Role at the time: Republican candidate for governor of California
Before the statement
Moderator Kaitlan Collins asked Hilton to clarify whether Sheriff Bianco took the right step in seizing the ballots, after Xavier Becerra said Bianco had violated the law.
After the statement
Hilton then said he supports voter ID and turned to allegations about Becerra's former chief of staff.
The California Governor Primary Debate (CNN transcript, May 5, 2026, 10-11p ET) · CNNTranscript, exchange beginning with the moderator's question to Xavier Becerra about the lawsuit against Sheriff Bianco (about 22:08-22:11 ET)Why this label?
The reference point is the sheriff's seizure and handling of the ballots. Hilton was asked directly whether the seizure was the right step and expressly declined to weigh in; his expression of trust in Bianco's interest in election integrity does not say the seizure was lawful or justified.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Sources
(29)
Original text
Cervantes v. Bianco (S295866), opinion of the Court and concurring opinion of Justice Liu
Relevant passage: Opinion of the Court, pp. 1-2, 6 (holding), 25-26; Liu, J., concurring
Excerpt
"We hold that the seizure of the ballots was unlawful."
About this source
The California Supreme Court's unanimous opinion on the voters' petition. It holds that Sheriff Bianco's seizure of the ballots violated Elections Code section 15551(d), orders the ballots returned to the Riverside County Registrar of Voters, and summarizes the facts and the warrants.
- Author
- Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero, for a unanimous court; Justice Goodwin Liu, concurring
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
California Supreme Court orders GOP sheriff to pause election probe and preserve seized ballots
Relevant passage: Report on the April 8 order
Excerpt
"Bianco and his office "are hereby ordered to pause the investigation into the November 2025 special election and preserve all seized items," the order reads."
About this source
Associated Press report, carried by PBS News, on the California Supreme Court's April 8 order in the Attorney General's case.
- Author
- Associated Press
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Chad Bianco defends getting warrant from judge who praised him
Relevant passage: Report on Bianco's interview and the warrant judge
Excerpt
"“It’s impossible to know who the duty judge is on that day,” he said in an interview Thursday"
About this source
CalMatters report on Sheriff Bianco's March 26 interview, the three warrants signed by Riverside Superior Court Judge Jay Kiel, whom Bianco endorsed in 2022, and the sealing of the warrants.
- Author
- Jeanne Kuang
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Respondents' Return to Order to Show Cause; Opposition to Petition for Writ of Mandate (Cervantes v. Bianco, S295866)
Relevant passage: Introduction and Summary of Argument, pp. 8-10
Excerpt
"Petitioners identify no clear, present, ministerial duty requiring the Sheriff to return or abandon evidence seized under court-issued warrants"
About this source
Sheriff Bianco's written return in the California Supreme Court opposing the voters' petition. It states his position that evidence seized under judicial warrants may be preserved and examined under court supervision and that the Elections Code does not repeal the courts' warrant authority.
- Author
- Tyler Law LLP and Law Offices of Bradley W. Hertz, counsel for Sheriff Chad Bianco
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Warrants that seized 650,000-plus Riverside County ballots are flawed, experts say
Relevant passage: Report on the unsealed warrants and the April 8 Supreme Court order
Excerpt
"On Wednesday, April 8, the California Supreme Court ordered a pause in the probe until it further reviews the investigation"
About this source
Press-Enterprise report on the unsealed warrants, the California Supreme Court's April 8 order pausing the investigation, and reactions from legal scholars and Sheriff Bianco.
- Author
- Jeff Horseman
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
California Supreme Court rules against Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco in ballot seizure fight
Relevant passage: Report on the rulings, including Bianco's telephone interview
Excerpt
"Bianco said in a telephone interview Thursday he was “extremely disappointed” with the Supreme Court’s decision."
About this source
Press-Enterprise report on the rulings with statements from Bianco, Bonta, Newsom and petitioner Clarissa Cervantes.
- Author
- Jeff Horseman
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Court denies California's bid to halt Riverside sheriff's recount of 2025 election ballots
Relevant passage: Report on the Court of Appeal's denial of the Attorney General's petition
Excerpt
"Bonta’s lawsuit in the 4th District Court of Appeal, filed Monday"
About this source
CalMatters report on the Attorney General's petition in the Court of Appeal, filed March 23 and denied March 24, and on the sheriff's response.
- Author
- Cayla Mihalovich and Jeanne Kuang
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Declaration of Sheriff Chad Bianco in Support of Respondents' Preliminary Opposition (Cervantes v. Bianco, S295866)
Relevant passage: Declaration, paragraphs 3-16, executed March 26, 2026
Excerpt
"RSO will not do any counting and has paused its investigation pending the resolution of the writ of mandate."
About this source
Sheriff Bianco's sworn declaration filed in the California Supreme Court, describing the warrants, the basis for the investigation and the pause in counting.
- Author
- Chad Bianco
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
California Secretary of State Shirley N. Weber, Ph.D., Sets the Record Straight about Accusations of Election Irregularities and Investigation Interference in Riverside County
Relevant passage: Press release PR26-33, March 20, 2026
Excerpt
"The Riverside County Sheriff’s Office has taken actions based on allegations that lack credible evidence and risk undermining public confidence in our elections."
About this source
Secretary of State Shirley Weber's press release responding to the Sheriff's March 20 news conference.
- Author
- California Secretary of State
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Alleged irregularities in elections probed by Riverside County Sheriff's Office
Relevant passage: Report on the sheriff's office statement and the Registrar's Feb. 10 presentation
Excerpt
"“conducting an investigation into alleged irregularities in our elections.”"
About this source
Press-Enterprise report in which the Sheriff's Office confirmed the investigation and Registrar Art Tinoco's February 10 explanation to the Board of Supervisors was described.
- Author
- Jeff Horseman
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco defends seizure of 656,000 ballots
Relevant passage: Report on the March 20 news conference; statements by Bonta and Weber
Excerpt
"“There is no legal justification for the attorney general to stop a lawful investigation,” he said"
About this source
Press-Enterprise report on the March 20 news conference, with responses from Attorney General Bonta's office and Secretary of State Weber.
- Author
- Jeff Horseman
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Application for Permission to File an Amicus Curiae Brief and Proposed Brief of Amicus Curiae California State Sheriffs' Association in Support of Respondents (Bonta v. Bianco, S295901)
Relevant passage: Introduction and Statement of the Case
Excerpt
"The Attorney General may disagree with the underlying investigation, but disagreement does not, and should not, amount to constitutional authority."
About this source
Amicus brief of the California State Sheriffs' Association filed in the California Supreme Court supporting Sheriff Bianco in the Attorney General's petition.
- Author
- California State Sheriffs' Association
- Published
- Accessed
Analysis
Search Warrants for Election Materials Get Their Day in Court
Relevant passage: Lawfare article published 2026-09-02
Excerpt
"And that makes the warrants not only improper but also a misplaced displacement of authority from one sphere to another that the California Supreme Court can and should address."
About this source
Election law scholar Justin Levitt's Lawfare analysis of the Riverside County warrants after the August 24 oral argument.
- Author
- Justin Levitt
- Published
- Accessed
Analysis
Just Released Riverside County Warrants Relied on Bogus Evidence of Likely Felony to Seize Ballots; Links to Warrants
Relevant passage: Election Law Blog post published 2026-04-08 23:15 UTC
Excerpt
"One of the claims made is that ballots were about to be destroyed."
About this source
Election law scholar Rick Hasen's post on the day the three Riverside County search warrants were made public, with links to the warrants.
- Author
- Rick Hasen
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
Win for Democracy: Supreme Court of California Orders Sheriff to Return Unlawfully Seized Ballots
Relevant passage: Press release dated September 24, 2026; statement of Bruce V. Spiva
Excerpt
"Sheriff Bianco’s illegal seizure of ballots is a dangerous escalation and blatantly unlawful intrusion by law enforcement"
About this source
Campaign Legal Center press release on the California Supreme Court's ruling. The organization filed a brief supporting the petitions on behalf of Common Cause and the League of Women Voters of California.
- Author
- Campaign Legal Center
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
California Supreme Court Hears Challenge to Sheriff Chad Bianco's Seizure of More Than 650,000 Riverside County Ballots
Relevant passage: Press release dated August 24, 2026
Excerpt
"“A criminal investigation is not a blanket license to ignore California election laws,” said Sonni Waknin"
About this source
Press release from the UCLA Voting Rights Project, which represents four Riverside County voters, on the August 24 oral argument in Cervantes v. Bianco.
- Author
- UCLA Voting Rights Project
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
Supervisor raises concerns over ballot seizure and misuse of county resources
Relevant passage: Press release dated March 23, 2026
Excerpt
"Sheriff Chad Bianco must return all 650,000 ballots where they belong, to the Riverside County Registrar of Voters"
About this source
Press release from the office of Riverside County Supervisor Jose Medina responding to the March 20 news conference at which Sheriff Bianco described the ballot investigation.
- Author
- Riverside County Supervisor Jose Medina
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Why CA Sheriff Chad Bianco seized ballots while running for governor
Relevant passage: Section 'Revisiting elections in Georgia and Arizona, too'
Excerpt
"“It’s very refreshing to see local law enforcement take action on these types of issues,” Dhillon said on Newsmax March 28."
About this source
USA TODAY report that quotes Harmeet Dhillon's March 28 Newsmax remarks about Sheriff Bianco's seizure, and Bianco's March 31 interview with the newspaper.
- Author
- Josh Meyer
- Published
- Accessed
Original post
Harmeet Dhillon post on local law enforcement action (X, March 28, 2026)
Excerpt
"It’s encouraging to see local law enforcement take action — Not everything can be done by the federal government!"
About this source
Post from the verified official account of Harmeet Dhillon, Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights at the U.S. Department of Justice, with a video of her Newsmax interview about Sheriff Bianco's ballot seizure.
- Author
- Harmeet Dhillon
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
The California Governor Primary Debate (CNN transcript, May 5, 2026, 10-11p ET)
Relevant passage: Transcript, exchange beginning with the moderator's question to Xavier Becerra about the lawsuit against Sheriff Bianco (about 22:08-22:11 ET)
Excerpt
"Sheriff Bianco didn't follow that process."
About this source
CNN's transcript of the televised Democratic and Republican gubernatorial debate. Moderator Kaitlan Collins asked Xavier Becerra and Steve Hilton about Sheriff Chad Bianco's seizure of the Riverside County ballots, and Bianco replied.
- Author
- CNN
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Respondent Riverside County Registrar of Voters' Return by Answer to Petition for Writ of Mandate (Cervantes v. Bianco, S295866)
Relevant passage: Introduction; Memorandum of Points and Authorities, Part I, p. 26
Excerpt
"Respondent therefore does not oppose the relief requested in the Petition"
About this source
The Registrar of Voters' return in the California Supreme Court, verified by Art Tinoco. It states his position on ballot custody, on his own compliance with the warrants, and on the voters' request that the ballots be returned.
- Author
- Riverside County Counsel and Strumwasser & Woocher LLP, counsel for Registrar of Voters Art Tinoco (verified by Art Tinoco)
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Brief of Real Party in Interest California Secretary of State Dr. Shirley N. Weber Concerning the Relief Requested in the Petition (Cervantes v. Bianco, S295866)
Relevant passage: Introduction, p. 5; Argument I, p. 7
Excerpt
"Sheriff Bianco violated Section 15551’s clear mandate when he removed voted ballots from the custody of the Riverside County Registrar of Voters."
About this source
The Secretary of State's brief filed in the California Supreme Court, stating her position that the seized ballots and election materials should be returned to the Riverside County Registrar of Voters.
- Author
- Illovsky Gates & Calia LLP, counsel for Secretary of State Shirley N. Weber
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
California Supreme Court orders seized ballots returned in Riverside County case
Relevant passage: Report on the rulings; Bianco fundraising email
Excerpt
"“I will obey the writs. I will not obey the message behind them — that local law enforcement works for Sacramento, not for the people who elected us.”"
About this source
Politico report on the two rulings, quoting a fundraising email from Sheriff Bianco, Attorney General Bonta's remarks to reporters and Governor Newsom's statement.
- Author
- Jeremy B. White
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
California Supreme Court orders Riverside County sheriff to return 650,000 seized ballots
Relevant passage: Report on the rulings; Bianco statement and email to supporters
Excerpt
"“We are very disappointed and wholeheartedly disagree with the court's ruling,” Bianco said in a statement shared later Thursday with The Associated Press."
About this source
Associated Press report on the rulings, including Sheriff Bianco's statement to the AP and his email to supporters saying he will comply with the court's rulings.
- Author
- Olga R. Rodriguez
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Sheriff broke law by seizing ballots, CA Supreme Court rules
Relevant passage: Report on the rulings; Bianco's written statement
Excerpt
"“We are very disappointed and wholeheartedly disagree with the court’s ruling,”"
About this source
CalMatters report on the California Supreme Court's two rulings, quoting Sheriff Bianco's written statement, Attorney General Bonta's news conference remarks, and the court's opinions.
- Author
- Ben Christopher and Nigel Duara
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
Governor Newsom on the California Supreme Court ruling Sheriff Bianco illegally seized ballots
Relevant passage: Press release, statement of Governor Gavin Newsom
Excerpt
"Today’s ruling affirms that in California we will defend democracy — using every branch of government."
About this source
Official press release with Governor Newsom's statement on the California Supreme Court's ruling in Cervantes v. Bianco.
- Author
- Office of Governor Gavin Newsom
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
Attorney General Bonta Secures Major Victories from State's Highest Court, Confirming Authority to Issue Binding Directives to Riverside Sheriff and Ordering Sheriff to Return Voted Ballots to the Registrar of Voters
Relevant passage: Press release, statement of Attorney General Rob Bonta
Excerpt
"The Court has now made clear that this kind of defiance cannot stand, that the Attorney General has the authority to intervene when sheriffs take improper action, and that voted ballots belong in the custody of elections officials."
About this source
Official press release with the Attorney General's statement on the two California Supreme Court decisions in Bonta v. Bianco and Cervantes v. Bianco.
- Author
- California Department of Justice, Office of the Attorney General
- Published
- Accessed
Original video
Election Fraud Investigation Press Conference (Riverside County Sheriff's Office, March 20, 2026)
Excerpt
"This investigation is simple. Physically count the ballots and compare that result with the total votes reported."
About this source
Video of the March 20, 2026 news conference at which Sheriff Bianco publicly described the ballot investigation, said a court had ordered a special master, and responded to the Attorney General's directives to halt it.
- Author
- Chad Bianco
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Bonta v. Bianco (S295901), opinion of the Court
Relevant passage: Opinion of the Court, Part I (background), Part II.A.2 (application), Part III (conclusion)
Excerpt
"the language of article V, section 13 plainly confers upon the Attorney General the authority to issue binding directions to a sheriff regarding a criminal investigation."
About this source
The California Supreme Court's unanimous opinion on the Attorney General's petition. It holds that the Attorney General may give a sheriff binding directions about a criminal investigation, that his directions to Sheriff Bianco were lawful, and orders compliance. Part I also gives the court's dated account of the warrants, the seizure and the exchanges between the Attorney General and the sheriff.
- Author
- Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero, for a unanimous court
- Published
- Accessed