California Supreme Court Hears Arguments Over Seized Election Ballots

The Supreme Court of California heard oral arguments on Monday regarding the seizure of approximately 650,000 ballots by Chad Bianco, the Sheriff of Riverside County. Bianco seized 1,000 boxes of materials from a November 2025 special election on redistricting, known as Proposition 50, to investigate claims from the Riverside Election Integrity Team that a 45,000-vote discrepancy existed. While the California Secretary of State reported the measure passed by over 3.4 million votes and County Registrar Art Tinoco stated the actual gap was only 103 votes, Bianco maintains the seizure was necessary to determine if voting machines counted ballots accurately.

Attorney General Rob Bonta and the UCLA Voting Rights Project filed lawsuits in March to recover the ballots, arguing that Bianco bypassed the legal channels required by the Election Code and failed to comply with the state constitution. Bonta asserts that the sheriff ignored direct supervision and authority provided by the government code. Former state attorney general Xavier Becerra also joined the UCLA lawsuit, calling for a decision that protects the right to vote and the confidence of the electorate.

Bianco's legal counsel argues the sheriff acted under a legal duty to investigate and is holding the materials as evidence for the court. The court is now deliberating whether the sheriff's investigative authority overrides established election law protocols and whether the attorney general has the authority to supervise county sheriffs to shut down such probes.