Weber tells the court the sheriff violated the ballot-custody mandate

Shirley WeberCalifornia Secretary of State and real party in interest in Cervantes v. Bianco (through counsel)

Condemned

In a brief to the California Supreme Court, Secretary of State Shirley Weber said the proper course was an order directing Sheriff Bianco to return the seized ballots and election materials to the Riverside County Registrar of Voters, and that Bianco "violated Section 15551's clear mandate" by removing voted ballots from the registrar's custody.

Responding to

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.

“In the Secretary of State’s view, the legally required and proper course is an order directing Sheriff Bianco and his office to immediately return the seized ballots and election materials to the Riverside County Registrar of Voters. … Sheriff Bianco violated Section 15551’s clear mandate when he removed voted ballots from the custody of the Riverside County Registrar of Voters. For that reason alone, the Court should issue an order compelling the return of those ballots and related materials to the proper custodian dictated by the Elections Code.”

Original text

Read the original text (opens in a new tab)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

Case updates

Updates on the Riverside ballot seizure after the court's ruling

Get notified if new court filings follow the California Supreme Court's ruling, Bianco takes further steps in his inquiry, or state officials respond.

Important updates only. Free. Confirm your email to start. Unsubscribe anytime. How we handle your email.

Editorial composite of Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco beside the California Supreme Court opinion in the ballot-seizure case.
Credit: Riverside County Sheriff's Office; Supreme Court of California; composite by The Dispute Index

Where this statement fits

Was Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco's seizure of about 650,000 ballots lawful?

Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco's department obtained search warrants in February and March 2026 and, on February 26, seized about 650,000 ballots from the November 2025 Proposition 50 special election from the county registrar of voters. Bianco said he was investigating a discrepancy of 45,896 ballots reported by a citizens' group; Registrar Art Tinoco said the reported gap reflected a misreading of preliminary records and that the actual variance was 103 ballots. Attorney General Rob Bonta directed Bianco on February 26 to preserve the materials and pause the investigation, and sued after Bianco said on March 20 that it would continue despite the Attorney General's attempts to stop it. On September 24, 2026, the California Supreme Court unanimously held in Cervantes v. Bianco that the seizure violated Elections Code section 15551(d) and ordered the ballots returned, and held in Bonta v. Bianco that the Attorney General may give a sheriff binding directions about an investigation. Bianco says the investigation was lawful and that he disagrees with the rulings, but has said he will obey the court's writs; the court did not resolve whether the claimed discrepancy exists.

Read the full case

Source and context

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) (opens in a new tab) · Supreme Court of CaliforniaIntroduction, p. 5; Argument I, p. 7

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.

Before the quotation

The voters' petition named the Secretary of State as a real party in interest under Elections Code section 13314, and her brief addressed the relief requested.

After the quotation

The brief added that Senate Bill 73, enacted after the seizure, reaffirmed the custody mandate and added civil and criminal penalties for taking ballots from an elections official's custody.

How this statement is classified

Condemned

The label describes this statement's response within the context above.

Why this label?

The reference point is the sheriff's seizure and handling of the ballots. Weber says Bianco violated the Elections Code's custody mandate and asks the court to compel the ballots' return, which expressly rejects the seizure as unlawful.

Recorded on
Published here
People and groups discussed
Chad Bianco

More from this case

Read the full case

Share or embed this statement

Quote card: Shirley Weber, Weber tells the court the sheriff violated the ballot-custody mandateDownload image (PNG)

The embed keeps its attribution link to The Dispute Index. Credit the image to The Dispute Index and link to the statement page.

Cite this record

Publisher
The Dispute Index
Title
Weber tells the court the sheriff violated the ballot-custody mandate
First published
Last updated
Permalink
https://disputeindex.com/events/2420-in-a-brief-to-the-california-supreme-court

Last updated marks the most recent saved version of this published statement.

The Dispute Index. "Weber tells the court the sheriff violated the ballot-custody mandate". First published: 2026-09-25. Last updated: 2026-09-25. https://disputeindex.com/events/2420-in-a-brief-to-the-california-supreme-court