California Supreme Court Deliberates on Seized Election Ballots
In a case stirring significant attention, the California Supreme Court is considering whether Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco should return seized election ballots to local officials. This scrutiny follows Bianco’s controversial action of confiscating 650,000 ballots from a November 2025 special election concerning redistricting, where the measure passed by approximately 80,000 votes.
Earlier this year, Sheriff Bianco took control of 1,000 boxes of election materials to probe a complaint from a citizen group alleging discrepancies in the vote count. The local election authorities had dismissed these claims as without merit. Notably, Bianco was in the race for governor at that time.
In response to Bianco’s actions, Democratic Attorney General Rob Bonta initiated a legal battle, asserting that the sheriff lacked the authority to seize election materials and accusing Bianco of attempting to undermine public trust in the electoral process. Bonta directed Bianco to return the ballots, a directive that has not been followed. Additionally, the UCLA Voting Rights Project has filed a lawsuit on behalf of Riverside County voters.
Chad Dunn, legal director and co-founder of the UCLA Voting Rights Project, argued in court that there are established procedures to challenge election results. “The elections code provides a process. Citizens could have triggered a recount within, I think, it’s five days of the canvas, and they chose not to do that,” Dunn stated, highlighting that official channels were ignored.
Although Bianco began a recount supervised by a court-appointed special master, he halted the process amid mounting legal opposition from the state attorney general and voting rights advocates, yet the ballots remain unreleased.
“Nowhere else in election law, in this state, in any other that I’m familiar with, does anybody get to handle ballots on their own in the back room with their deputies,” Dunn expressed to the court.
Bianco’s defense attorney, Bradley Hertz, contended that the sheriff was obligated to investigate the complaint and had adhered to legal protocols, including issuing search warrants in February. Hertz defended the retention of the ballots, stating they serve as “evidence” in ongoing legal proceedings.
Bianco, who did not progress to the general election in the gubernatorial race and has since set sights on reelection as sheriff in 2028, maintained his stance post-hearing, indicating he would repeat his actions under similar circumstances. “I did this and this was legal,” he remarked, asserting the legality of his chosen route despite opposition.
The episode coincides with broader national discussions on election integrity, influenced by former President Donald Trump’s persistent challenges to the 2020 election results. Recently, the federal government seized ballots and documents from an election office in Georgia, reflecting a trend of election-related legal confrontations.
For more information on this story, you can read the full article on redistricting and further details about Bianco’s actions here.
