SAN FRANCISCO (AP) \u2014 The California Supreme Court is weighing whether a Southern California sheriff who seized election ballots must return them to county election officials. <\/p>\n
The high court heard oral arguments Monday regarding Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco\u2019s seizure of approximately 650,000 ballots from a November 2025 special election on redistricting<\/a>. The measure passed in the county by roughly 80,000 votes.<\/p>\n Bianco in March seized 1,000 boxes of election materials<\/a> to investigate a complaint from a local citizens group that the count was off \u2014 though not by an amount that would have changed the outcome. Local election officials had previously said the complaint was unfounded. Bianco was running for governor<\/a> at the time. <\/p>\n Democratic Attorney General Rob Bonta immediately launched a legal challenge in March, arguing the sheriff has no authority over election materials and warning the seizure was designed to sow distrust in elections. He ordered Bianco to return the ballots, but Bianco did not. The University of California, Los Angeles Voting Rights Project also sued the sheriff on behalf of several Riverside County voters. The state Supreme Court heard arguments in both cases.<\/p>\n Chad Dunn, legal director and co-founder of the UCLA Voting Rights Project, told the court there are mechanisms to contest election results, and Bianco failed to follow them. <\/p>\n \u201cThe elections code provides a process. Citizens could have triggered a recount within, I think, it\u2019s five days of the canvass, and they chose not to do that. They could ask the attorney general, the secretary of state, and there\u2019s other officials to trigger an official recount,\u201d Dunn told the court. <\/p>\n Bianco began recounting the vote using sheriff\u2019s officials under the supervision of a special master appointed by a court but suspended it days later, citing mounting legal challenges<\/a> from the state attorney general and a voting rights group. But he has not returned the ballots.<\/p>\n \u201cNowhere else in election law, in this state, in any other that I\u2019m familiar with, does anybody get to handle ballots on their own in the back room with their deputies,\u201d Dunn told the judges.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n \n Sign up for the Ground Game Newsletter: Bradley Hertz, who represented Bianco, argued the sheriff had a legal duty to open an investigation after receiving a complaint and he followed the penal code to carry out that investigation, first issuing search warrants in February.<\/p>\n Hertz said Bianco has not returned the ballots to the Riverside County registrar of voters because those ballots are \u201cevidence.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThe sheriff is holding that evidence, safeguarding it as a custodian for the court,\u201d Hertz said.<\/p>\n He said Bianco didn\u2019t follow Bonta\u2019s order to return the ballots because a legal fight was already playing out.<\/p>\n Bianco said after the hearing that if he were to face the same complaint, he would again seize ballots.<\/p>\n \u201cI did this and this was legal,\u201d he said. \u201cI went a different route. They are legal. Both routes are legal. It\u2019s just their side doesn\u2019t like the route I chose,\u201d he told reporters. <\/p>\n At the time of the ballots\u2019 seizure, Bianco was one of two prominent Republicans running for governor in a crowded June primary. He did not advance to the general election and later announced plans to run for reelection as sheriff in 2028.<\/p>\n
\n Your guide to the biggest stories in politics, policy and U.S. elections.\n <\/p>\n