California State Sheriffs' Association says the Attorney General cannot nullify a sheriff's lawful investigation
Professional association of California sheriffs; amicus curiae supporting Sheriff Bianco in Bonta v. Bianco
“Boiled down, the case asks a single fundamental question: Whether the Attorney General may unilaterally interfere with, terminate, or nullify a sheriff’s lawful criminal investigation conducted pursuant to search warrants issued by a neutral magistrate. … The Attorney General may disagree with the underlying investigation, but disagreement does not, and should not, amount to constitutional authority.”
Source and context
Original text
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.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)Before the quotation
The brief was filed in the Attorney General's petition, which concerned whether the Attorney General could direct Bianco to pause the investigation.
After the quotation
The California Supreme Court later held that the Attorney General's authority includes binding directions to sheriffs about a criminal investigation.
How this statement is classified
Responding to: The Attorney General has no legal authority to order a sheriff to halt or pause a lawful criminal investigation.
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, including his continuing after the Attorney General's directives. The association describes the investigation as lawful and conducted under judicial warrants and argues the Attorney General lacks authority to halt it, which defends the sheriff's position.
- Recorded on
- Published here
- People and groups discussed
- Rob Bonta
Was Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco's seizure of about 650,000 ballots lawful?
Explore the case context, sources and public responses.
More from this case
Read the full caseCampaign Legal Center
“Sheriff Bianco’s illegal seizure of ballots is a dangerous escalation and blatantly unlawful intrusion by law enforcement … In Riverside County and a growing number of localities across the country, actions like this risk disrupting critical chain of custody procedures, endangering sensitive voter data, sidestepping recount and contest procedures, and amplifying baseless claims, ultimately undermining the freedom to vote.”Read statement
“Governor Gavin Newsom today released the following statement in response to the California Supreme Court ruling Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco illegally seized hundreds of thousands of ballots from last year’s special election … Today’s ruling affirms that in California we will defend democracy — using every branch of government. And the new laws I signed just last week add new protections so attacks like this cannot happen again. People deserve to know their ballot is counted and secure, and in California we will do everything we can to protect that constitutional right — this year, and beyond.”Read statement
“Election fraud can and should be investigated. But misuse of criminal investigative tools — without any evidence that a crime was committed — needlessly undermines trust in our elections system and in law enforcement. After the Sheriff took the extraordinary step of obtaining warrants to seize control over voted ballots, I made a modest request to him: pause your investigation, preserve all evidence, and provide the information needed for my office to review the allegations. Instead, Sheriff Bianco pressed forward with the seizure of hundreds of thousands of ballots. 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.”Read statement