Today·Emerging
Follow-up 2h ago Major3
100%
California Supreme Court Orders Riverside Sheriff to Return 650,000 Seized Ballots
The California Supreme Court unanimously ruled that Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco unlawfully seized over 650,000 ballots from a November 2025 congressional redistricting election and ordered their immediate return to election officials. The court found state law prohibits removal of voted ballots from election officials' custody, even during criminal investigations. The case has drawn national attention as a test of ballot handling amid broader disputes over election integrity.
Quick Facts
- Bianco seized approximately 650,000 ballots from November 2025 special election
- California Supreme Court ruled the seizure unlawful
- Court ordered return of all seized ballots to election officials
- Court ordered Bianco to refrain from further handling ballots
- Bianco began recount but suspended it due to legal challenges

The California Supreme Court unanimously ruled on Thursday that Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco unlawfully seized approximately 650,000 ballots from a November 2025 special election on congressional redistricting (Proposition 50) and ordered their immediate return to election officials. Bianco seized the ballots in February, claiming to investigate alleged voter fraud following a complaint from a local citizens group about a discrepancy in vote counts. Local election officials had previously determined the complaint was unfounded. The measure, which redrew congressional districts in ways favorable to Democrats and was backed by Governor Gavin Newsom, passed statewide and won in Riverside County by roughly 80,000 votes.
Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero wrote in the court's decision that California law requires voted ballots to remain in the custody and control of election officials even during criminal investigations. The court found that Bianco lacked authority to seize the materials and that established mechanisms exist in state law to investigate election improprieties without compromising ballot integrity. Bianco was ordered to "refrain from further handling of the ballots except as necessary to comply with our order." Bianco had begun a recount using sheriff's officials under a court-appointed special master but suspended it days later amid legal challenges; he has not returned the ballots to date, claiming they are evidence in an ongoing investigation.
The legal challenges came from Democratic Attorney General Rob Bonta, who argued Bianco had no authority over election materials and that the seizure was designed to undermine election confidence, and from the UCLA Voting Rights Project, which sued on behalf of Riverside County voters. Bradley Hertz, Bianco's attorney, argued the sheriff had a legal duty to investigate after receiving a complaint and followed proper penal code procedures by issuing search warrants. Bianco, a Republican and prominent supporter of election fraud claims, was running for governor at the time of the seizure but did not advance through the primary. He has announced plans to run for reelection as sheriff in 2028.
The ruling arrives amid broader concerns about ballot seizures. President Donald Trump's administration seized ballots and documents from an election office in Georgia in January 2026, and some Republicans have echoed Trump's rhetoric disputing the 2020 election results. Election officials and civil rights groups have monitored the Bianco case closely, anticipating possible similar attempts to interfere with ballots in November 2026 elections. Governor Newsom signed legislation on Saturday that would prevent anyone from seizing ballots as Bianco did, describing the new laws as protections against future attacks.
Why This Matters
The ruling establishes binding precedent on ballot custody during criminal investigations: election officials retain control of voted ballots regardless of fraud allegations, and sheriffs cannot seize them via warrant. Counties and election offices nationwide will likely reference this decision when responding to similar seizure attempts. The immediate effect: Riverside County must regain custody of 650,000 ballots within the court's timeline, affecting the verifiability of vote counts in Proposition 50 and potentially the validity of the measure's certification. The case signals legal vulnerability for future ballot seizures, altering the risk calculus for law enforcement claiming investigatory authority over election materials.
Timeline & Sources
Nov 1, 2025
WireProposition 50 special election on congressional redistricting held; measure passes statewide and in Riverside County
Jan 1, 2026
WireTrump administration seizes ballots and documents from election office in Georgia
Nov 3, 2026
WireCalifornia midterm elections with governor and congressional races
Jan 1, 2028
WireBianco plans to run for reelection as sheriff
Sources
- Sheriff Ballots Seized California Supreme Court E77a7eda321df80fa69da835e925e5b0apWireSep 24, 2026
- California sheriff ordered to return ballots he confiscated in voter ‘fraud’ inquiryThe GuardianMediaSep 24, 2026
- Ballot seizure by Riverside County sheriff was ‘unlawful,’ California Supreme Court rulesLos Angeles TimesMediaSep 24, 2026