The California Supreme Court unanimously ruled on Thursday, September 24, 2026, that Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco’s seizure of roughly 650,000 voted ballots from a special election was unlawful, ordering him to return the materials immediately to the county registrar.
The state high court delivered a pair of unanimous rulings that definitively halted an unprecedented local sheriff’s investigation into a statewide election authored by Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero. The dispute centered on ballots cast during a November 2025 special election covering Proposition 50, a congressional redistricting measure backed by Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom that easily passed across the state and carried Bianco’s home county by roughly 80,000 votes.
How the Seizure and Legal Battle Unfolded
The controversy began when a local citizens’ group claimed it discovered a discrepancy between its own calculations and the official vote count in the Proposition 50 special election. Though local election officials dismissed the complaint as unfounded, Sheriff Chad Bianco’s department obtained two search warrants in February 2026 to seize approximately 650,000 ballots and election materials from the county registrar.
Bianco initially commenced a vote recount using sheriff’s personnel under the supervision of a court-appointed special master, but suspended the effort days later amid mounting legal challenges. Despite pausing the physical recount, the sheriff refused to return the confiscated documents. This defiance triggered two separate lawsuits: one brought by California Attorney General Rob Bonta to halt the probe, and another filed by the University of California, Los Angeles Voting Rights Project on behalf of several local residents, including Riverside Councilmember Clarissa Cervantes. The state Supreme Court heard oral arguments in both matters last month.
The Supreme Court Rulings and Statutory Protections
Writing for the unanimous bench, the chief justice dismantled the legal defense mounted by Bianco’s attorney, Bradley Hertz, who had argued that the search warrants authorized the sheriff to retain the ballots as evidence in an ongoing criminal investigation. The high court ruled that California law mandates voted ballots remain under the custody and control of election officials, even when law enforcement probes suspected wrongdoing.
Photo: Los Angeles Times
“While allegations of election improprieties are a very serious matter, our Elections Code contains numerous established mechanisms for investigating and proving misconduct that do not compromise the integrity of voted ballots — contrary to the means employed here.”
The justices also rejected the theory that a local sheriff possesses independent authority to countermand state oversight. The court’s opinion noted that the arguments presented by Bianco’s legal team boiled down to the unsustainable view that the state’s chief law enforcement officer must remain a mere bystander during an unprecedented intervention of statewide significance. The court also found that California Attorney General Rob Bonta was within his rights under the state constitution to order the sheriff to halt the investigation and order Bianco to comply with Bonta’s directives. In a unanimous decision in the Cervantes v. Bianco case, the high court’s seven justices said allowing law enforcement unfettered access to ballots, or the ability to handle and count them in secret based on unregulated protocols, itself creates a substantial risk to election integrity.
Broader Political Fallout and New Legislative Safeguards
The case drew national scrutiny because it mirrored broader political rhetoric surrounding election administration. State leaders moved swiftly to legislate against similar actions. Governor Newsom noted that he signed a bill into law that introduces explicit protections preventing anyone from seizing ballots in the manner attempted in Riverside County.
California Supreme Court to hear arguments over Riverside Sheriff Chad Bianco's ballot seizure case
Today’s ruling affirms that in California we will defend democracy – using every branch of government,” Newsom said in a statement. “People deserve to know their ballot is counted and secure, and in California we will do everything we can to protect that co
With the unanimous ruling finalized, the Supreme Court ordered Bianco to refrain from further handling of the ballots except to complete their transfer back to the Riverside County registrar.
