Justin Levitt says the warrant applications showed no probable cause and were improper
Justin LevittProfessor of law at Loyola Law School and election law scholar, writing in Lawfare
Election law scholar Justin Levitt wrote in Lawfare that the warrant applications identified no probable cause to believe the ballots would yield evidence of a crime, and that the warrants were therefore "not only improper but also a misplaced displacement of authority".
Responding to
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.
“The applications, like earlier investigations in Riverside, identified no probable cause to believe that the ballots to be seized would yield evidence of any criminal act. 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.”
Analysis
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.
Source and context
Analysis
About this source
Election law scholar Justin Levitt's Lawfare analysis of the Riverside County warrants after the August 24 oral argument.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)Before the quotation
The article was published after the August 24 oral argument in the California Supreme Court.
After the quotation
Levitt wrote that systems for reviewing and auditing elections belong to civil processes, while the criminal process is meant to address intentional malfeasance.
How this statement is classified
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. Levitt says the applications showed no probable cause and calls the warrants improper, which expressly rejects the basis for the seizure.
- Recorded on
- Published here
- People and groups discussed
- Chad Bianco
More from this case
Read the full caseXavier Becerra opposes Bianco's ballot seizure
“a great victory”Read statement
Oscar Ortiz opposes Bianco's ballot seizure
“political advantage”Read statement
Nathan P. Kempe opposes Bianco's ballot seizure
“reject similar attacks”Read statement
Share or embed this statement
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
- Justin Levitt says the warrant applications showed no probable cause and were improper
- First published
- Last updated
- Permalink
- https://disputeindex.com/events/2430-election-law-scholar-justin-levitt-wrote-in-lawfare
Last updated marks the most recent saved version of this published statement.
The Dispute Index. "Justin Levitt says the warrant applications showed no probable cause and were improper". First published: 2026-09-25. Last updated: 2026-09-25. https://disputeindex.com/events/2430-election-law-scholar-justin-levitt-wrote-in-lawfare