Skip to main content

California Supreme Court Orders Return of 650,000 Prop. 50 Ballots Unlawfully Seized by Riverside Sheriff

by Bridget Luckey | Sep 24, 2026
Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco speaks at an event.
Photo Source: Benjamin Fanjoy/Getty Images

The California Supreme Court unanimously ordered Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco to return about 650,000 ballots from California’s 2025 Proposition 50 election Thursday, ruling that his department violated state election law by removing the voted ballots from county election officials.

In a companion ruling involving the same election investigation, the justices also upheld California Attorney General Rob Bonta’s authority to issue binding directions to Bianco. The sheriff must stop further investigative activity while Bonta reviews the allegations and preserve remaining records gathered during the probe.

Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero wrote both opinions for a unanimous court. The decisions return the voted ballots to the Riverside County Registrar of Voters while leaving Bonta in control of the state’s review of Bianco’s investigation.

Bianco’s department seized the ballots on Feb. 26 after obtaining search warrants while investigating alleged discrepancies in Riverside County’s results from the November 2025 Proposition 50 special election. Deputies took 12 pallets containing roughly 1,000 boxes of ballots from the registrar and moved them to a secure facility accessible only to sheriff’s department employees.

Sheriff’s employees began hand-counting the ballots on March 5. The count stopped later that day after Bianco told Bonta’s office that his department would comply with the attorney general’s directive to pause the investigation. The ballots were returned to their boxes, resealed, and remained in the secured facility.

Bianco’s department later executed another warrant and seized 11 additional pallets of election materials.

Under Thursday’s ruling in Cervantes v. Bianco, every package containing voted ballots must be returned to the registrar “forthwith.” Bianco may handle them only as needed to comply with the order.

California election law requires voted ballots to remain in the physical custody of election officials, including when law enforcement seeks to examine them during a criminal investigation. Procedures exist for investigators to obtain access to ballots while leaving their custody with election officials.

Guerrero said allowing law enforcement to seize, handle, or count ballots outside those procedures creates “a substantial risk to election integrity.” The court found that the search warrants obtained by Bianco could not override the state’s ballot custody requirements.

The ruling supersedes the Riverside County search warrants wherever they conflict with the court’s order returning the ballots.

Bianco’s investigation began after the Riverside Election Integrity Team pointed to a roughly 45,900-vote difference between handwritten ballot intake estimates and Riverside County’s certified election total. County election officials said those handwritten figures were preliminary, excluded some ballots and were susceptible to counting errors. Using the registrar’s official counting method, officials identified a discrepancy of about 103 ballots.

The Supreme Court left those competing claims about the vote totals unresolved. Its decision addressed whether Bianco had legal authority to remove voted ballots from election officials and keep them in sheriff-controlled custody.

Riverside City Councilmember Clarissa Cervantes and three other county voters brought the challenge seeking the ballots’ return. Bonta pursued a separate case after Bianco disputed the attorney general’s authority to direct his department’s handling of the investigation.

Bonta had instructed Bianco to preserve the seized materials, pause further investigative activity, and provide his office with records so the attorney general could review the factual and legal basis for the probe. The dispute raised a broader question about how much control California’s attorney general can exercise over an independently elected county sheriff.

In Bonta v. Bianco, the Supreme Court held that the California Constitution and state law give the attorney general supervisory authority over county sheriffs and allow the office to issue binding directions concerning criminal investigations.

The justices ordered Bianco to comply with the directives Bonta has already issued. Records and election materials still held by the sheriff must be preserved while the attorney general conducts his review. The approximately 650,000 voted ballots are subject to the separate Cervantes order and must go back to the registrar.

The two decisions leave any further review of the underlying election allegations under Bonta’s supervision while restoring the ballots to the custody required by California election law.

Thursday’s rulings also come after Gov. Gavin Newsom signed legislation this month strengthening protections for ballots and other election materials following the Riverside County seizure. The Supreme Court said the newer law did not alter its conclusion that Bianco’s removal of the voted ballots violated the law already in effect when his department executed the warrants.

Share This Article

If you found this article insightful, consider sharing it with your network.

Bridget Luckey
Bridget studied Communications and Marketing at California State University, Long Beach. She also has experience in the live music events industry, which has allowed her to travel to festivals around the world. During this period, she acquired valuable expertise in branding, marketing, event planning, and public relations.

Related Articles

The U.S. Supreme Court building under a blue sky.

Supreme Court Rejects Trump's Bid to Block 20,000 California Ballots

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday rejected the Trump administration's last-minute attempt to block California from counting mail ballots associated with more than 20,000 voters suspected of being noncitizens, leaving the state's election procedures intact one day before the November 3, 2026, midterm elections.The justices denied the November 2 emergency... Read More about Supreme Court Rejects Trump's Bid to Block 20,000 California Ballots

California voter information guides and an Orange County official vote-by-mail ballot envelope.

Trump DOJ Drops California Ballot Lawsuit After Supreme Court Loss

The Justice Department moved Friday, November 6, 2026, to dismiss its lawsuit over approximately 20,000 California voters suspected of being noncitizens, four days after the Supreme Court rejected the Trump administration's emergency appeal and a week before a judge was scheduled to examine the government's disputed voter list.Assistant U.S. Attorney... Read More about Trump DOJ Drops California Ballot Lawsuit After Supreme Court Loss

Former Los Angeles County Sheriff Alex Villanueva speaks at a podium in uniform during a law enforcement event.

Former LA Sheriff Alex Villanueva Wins Immunity in Lawsuit Over Protesters Shot With Projectiles

Former Los Angeles County Sheriff Alex Villanueva is entitled to qualified immunity in an excessive force lawsuit brought by two protesters who allege deputies shot them with projectiles as they retreated from a 2020 demonstration, a federal appeals court ruled Wednesday, October 21, 2026. The decision reverses a lower court... Read More about Former LA Sheriff Alex Villanueva Wins Immunity in Lawsuit Over Protesters Shot With Projectiles

A hand holds a California vote-by-mail return envelope in front of a “VOTE HERE” sign.

DOJ Subpoenas California Election Officials in Criminal Voting Probe

The Justice Department has issued federal grand jury subpoenas to California election officials as part of a criminal investigation into alleged noncitizen voting, ordering three Los Angeles County employees to testify one day after the November 3 midterm elections.The subpoenas, dated October 21 and 24, 2026, seek voter records, communications... Read More about DOJ Subpoenas California Election Officials in Criminal Voting Probe

Legal term

Search articles and Legalpedia

Subscribe to Newsletter