UCLA Voting Rights Project says a criminal investigation does not override election law

UCLA Voting Rights ProjectLegal advocacy organization representing four Riverside County voters in Cervantes v. Bianco

Condemned

After the August 24 oral argument, the UCLA Voting Rights Project said Sheriff Bianco did not follow California's procedures before seizing the ballots and beginning to count them outside election officials' custody, and its counsel Sonni Waknin said "A criminal investigation is not a blanket license to ignore California election laws".

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.

“Sheriff Bianco did not follow those procedures before seizing the ballots and beginning to count them outside the custody of Riverside County election officials. … What we’ve asked the court today to do is make sure sheriffs and everybody else in this state understand the Elections Code applies to them as well … A criminal investigation is not a blanket license to ignore California election laws”

Official statement

Read the official statement (opens in a new tab)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

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

Official statement

California Supreme Court Hears Challenge to Sheriff Chad Bianco's Seizure of More Than 650,000 Riverside County Ballots (opens in a new tab) · UCLA Voting Rights ProjectPress release dated August 24, 2026

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.

Before the quotation

The Project filed the voters' petition on March 25 and argued Cervantes v. Bianco before the California Supreme Court on August 24.

After the quotation

Xavier Becerra, a senior adviser to the Project and an attorney of record, said the group hoped for a swift decision protecting the ballots.

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. The Project says Bianco bypassed the procedures for custody and counting and that a criminal investigation does not excuse ignoring election law, which expressly rejects the seizure.

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: UCLA Voting Rights Project, UCLA Voting Rights Project says a criminal investigation does not override election lawDownload 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
UCLA Voting Rights Project says a criminal investigation does not override election law
First published
Last updated
Permalink
https://disputeindex.com/events/2427-after-the-august-24-oral-argument-the-ucla

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

The Dispute Index. "UCLA Voting Rights Project says a criminal investigation does not override election law". First published: 2026-09-25. Last updated: 2026-09-25. https://disputeindex.com/events/2427-after-the-august-24-oral-argument-the-ucla