Loading record
Disputes over the role of federal law enforcement agencies in and around elections, including claims about their presence, authority, or conduct near polling places.
Counts show individual statements. They do not assign an overall position.
2 statements on this page. Dates: September 24, 2026 to October 28, 2026
2 matching statements. Dates: September 24, 2026 to October 28, 2026
2 published statements. Dates: September 24, 2026 to October 28, 2026
2 published statements. Dates: September 24, 2026 to October 28, 2026
2 statements on this page. Dates: September 24, 2026 to October 28, 2026
Role at the time: California attorney general
Statement summary
Bonta calls the ruling a victory for the right to vote and says the administration's noncitizenship claims are highly unreliable.
“No administration can disenfranchise thousands of individuals or disrupt an ongoing election based on highly unreliable claims of noncitizenship”
Press release from Attorney General Rob Bonta's office issued after the district court denied the temporary restraining order. It quotes Bonta and Governor Gavin Newsom and links to the order.
Relative to DOJ's request to segregate the flagged ballots, Bonta rejects it as disenfranchising voters on unreliable claims.
Role at the time: California Attorney General; petitioner in Bonta v. Bianco and amicus curiae in Cervantes v. Bianco
Response to this 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.
“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.”
Official press release with the Attorney General's statement on the two California Supreme Court decisions in Bonta v. Bianco and Cervantes v. Bianco.
The reference point is the sheriff's seizure and handling of the ballots. Bonta says the seizure misused criminal investigative tools and that Bianco's refusal to pause was defiance that cannot stand, which expressly rejects the conduct; his statement that fraud can be investigated does not soften that.
