California Attorney General Rob Bonta has asked the state Supreme Court to immediately halt an alleged voter‑fraud investigation by Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, arguing the sheriff defied state authority by seizing more than 650,000 ballots from a recent special election.
The request escalates a constitutional clash between California’s top law enforcement officer and a sheriff who is also running for governor.
Bianco has defended the probe as necessary to maintain public trust in elections, saying the investigation is “just as much to prove the election is accurate as it is to show otherwise” and describing it as a fact‑finding effort rather than a criminal case.
Bianco’s seizure of Riverside County’s ballots stems from an audit by a local group calling itself the Riverside Election Integrity Team, which claimed the county’s tally included nearly 46,000 more ballots than were received in the election, which the county has rejected.
Bonta, whose office has been separately investigating the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department since February 2023 due to a rise in jail deaths and other issues, also raised concerns about the merits of the voter-fraud investigation, citing “legal deficiencies” in the affidavits supporting the warrants Bianco obtained.
The petition, filed March 27, asks the California Supreme Court to stop Bianco from continuing his investigation and to order him to comply with the attorney general’s directives.
More: Here’s why California AG clashes with Riverside sheriff over ballots
Investigation continued despite AG’s demands
California Attorney General Rob Bonta, left, and Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco.
According to the filing, Bianco obtained search warrants on Feb. 9 and Feb. 23 and began seizing ballots later that month. After Bonta directed the sheriff on Feb. 26 to pause the investigation, Bianco instead seized roughly 1,000 boxes of ballots that same day and continued his inquiry in the weeks that followed.
The attorney general’s office issued additional directives in early March ordering Bianco to halt the investigation and provide records explaining its legal basis. The sheriff did not comply, the filing states.
Bianco obtained a third search warrant on March 19 and held a press conference the following day, where he said the investigation would continue despite Bonta’s objections.
“The outrage that an investigation was happening was extremely concerning to me, especially coming from someone who claims to be a law enforcement officer,” Bianco said at the press conference. “I’ve said this a minimum of a thousand times — he’s an embarrassment to law enforcement.”
Four days later, on March 24, Bianco seized an additional 426 boxes of ballot materials, completing the seizures authorized under the warrants, according to the petition.
That same day, a state appeals court declined to intervene, prompting the attorney general’s office to seek emergency review from California’s highest court.
“The Court of Appeal’s decision was based solely on where we filed the case and is not a ruling on the underlying merits of the petition,” Bonta’s office said in a statement.
Uncertainty mounts over lack of special master oversight
In a separate filing on March 26, the UCLA Voting Rights Project asked the California Supreme Court to order Bianco to return the seized ballots to the Riverside County Registrar of Voters, arguing that state law requires election materials to remain in official custody.
That petition was filed on behalf of four Riverside County voters: Indio City Councilmember Oscar Ortiz, Riverside City Councilmember Clarissa Cervantes, Rebecca Robinson, and Nathan Kempe, an advocate for increased sheriff accountability in the county.
Bianco said at his March 20 press conference that a special master would oversee a court‑supervised review of the ballots. However, both the warrants and the affidavits supporting the seizures remain under court seal.
In a letter filed Friday, March 27, the UCLA Voting Rights Project said no special master has been appointed, citing reporting by The New York Times.
Bonta’s petition, filed the following day, likewise states that it is “unclear if a special master has been appointed or whether a ‘recount’ has begun.”
What does the California Supreme Court petition say?
In his filing, Bonta argues that Bianco’s actions violate the California Constitution by disregarding the attorney general’s supervisory authority over county sheriffs. As the state’s designated “chief law officer,” the attorney general has the power to direct local law enforcement in criminal investigations, the petition states.
The filing characterizes the dispute as an “unprecedented constitutional emergency” and asks the court to issue an immediate stay halting the investigation while the case is reviewed.
Bonta also argues the investigation lacks a valid legal basis, noting that Bianco has not identified a specific crime or suspect to justify the search warrants. The petition further contends that removing ballots from election officials may violate state law requiring election materials to remain in official custody.
The California Supreme Court must now decide whether to take up the case — and whether to grant the attorney general’s request to temporarily stop the investigation.
Jennifer Cortez covers education in the Coachella Valley. Reach her at jennifer.cortez@desertsun.com.
This article originally appeared on Palm Springs Desert Sun: California AG asks high court to halt Riverside sheriff ballot probe