Bianco says he’ll obey Supreme Court order on Prop. 50 ballots, county won’t say when they’ll be destroyed as group asks court to preserve them

RIVERSIDE, Calif. (KESQ) The California Supreme Court ruled unanimously Thursday that Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco broke state election law when he seized the ballots from the November 2025 Proposition 50 special election. The justices ordered him to return them to the Riverside County Registrar of Voters immediately.

A second unanimous ruling, released at the same time, went to Attorney General Rob Bonta. The court said Bonta had every right to order the sheriff to stop, and that Bianco had no choice but to listen.

"Sheriff Bianco broke the law, violated the law, acted illegally," Bonta told reporters Thursday. "We acted because we had to."

Bianco now has to halt his investigation while Bonta reviews it, hang onto everything else he seized and turn over his case files to the attorney general.

The sheriff sent this statement Thursday evening:

"We are very disappointed and wholeheartedly disagree with the court's ruling. The investigation was a lawful and legal investigation into potential election fraud. The facts of this case have never been disputed, this was an obvious legal attempt to prevent the investigation from occurring that was successful. By granting the attorney general the ability to prevent lawful investigations, this ruling will have negative consequences for public safety in California.

Confidence in our elections is essential. This ruling and the destruction of potential evidence without answers undermines the public trust in our systems.

Riverside County residents should be assured that as long as I am their Sheriff, I will continue to fight crime and corruption regardless of where it comes from."

The county, meanwhile, says the ballots will be returned. County Executive Officer Jeff Van Wagenen released this statement Thursday:

"The California Supreme Court today provided clear direction regarding the custody of the ballots from the November 2025 Special Election. The Registrar of Voters will work with the Sheriff's Department to ensure the ballots are returned promptly and handled securely in accordance with established election procedures.

California law provides detailed protections governing the custody, handling, and counting of ballots. These safeguards include strict chain-of-custody requirements, oversight, and public transparency. These are fundamental to protecting the integrity of our elections.

The County has confidence in Registrar Art Tinoco and the dedicated professionals in the Registrar of Voters office. They have continued to perform their responsibilities under extraordinarily difficult circumstances while remaining focused on the work ahead.

With today's rulings providing clarity on the legal issues before the Court, our focus remains where it has been throughout this matter: administering secure, accurate, and transparent lawful elections, and preparing for the November 3 General Election."

News Channel 3 asked the county Friday whether the ballots are back yet and when they'll be destroyed. Spokesperson Brooke Federico said there's no update on the timeline, and that the registrar's office will not be available for interview as they prepare for the November 3 general election.

How the fight over Riverside County's ballots started

It began in February, when a citizens group went to the sheriff's department and said the numbers didn't add up. The Riverside Election Integrity Team had gone through handwritten ballot intake logs kept by election workers and concluded the county counted 45,896 more ballots than it took in.

Tinoco said the real gap was 103 ballots, and that it came down to human error. The handwritten logs are rough estimates filled out in the field, he said, and the group's math left out about 6,000 ballots.

Bianco already had a search warrant by the time Tinoco walked the Board of Supervisors through all of that. He'd gotten it the day before, and sheriff's personnel sat in on the presentation. Two weeks later, when the department went back for a second warrant, it told the judge the registrar "has not given a reason for the discrepancy."

Deputies hauled about 1,000 boxes of ballots out of the registrar's office on Feb. 26 and started counting them by hand a week later.

Bonta ordered the sheriff to stop. Bianco got a third warrant without telling him and seized more. In April, the Supreme Court froze everything.

Nobody in the case, Bianco included, disputes that the discrepancy couldn't have changed the result.

Prop. 50 passed in Riverside County with 56 percent of the vote.

What the court said

State law says voted ballots stay with the county elections official, and the court found no exceptions to that, not for a criminal investigation and not for a search warrant. Bianco "had no authority to seize the ballots," Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero wrote.

The second ruling settled something bigger. The state constitution has given the attorney general direct supervision over sheriffs since 1934, but in all that time no court had said what that actually means. Now one has. The attorney general can give a sheriff orders, and the sheriff has to follow them.

What happens now

The ballots go back to the registrar. What happens to them after that is the next fight.

State law only required the county to keep the 2025 ballot packages for six months, and that clock ran out in May. The Supreme Court's April order is the only reason they still exist, and it expires once Thursday's ruling becomes final.

A Riverside County nonprofit called the Election Accountability Project is trying to keep them around longer.

On Sept. 21, it asked the Supreme Court to block the county from destroying records from the 2025 special election and the November 2024 general election, according to the court's docket. The group won a temporary restraining order in Riverside County Superior Court in August, but says the judge later sided with the county and the Court of Appeal turned down an emergency appeal.

The group isn't alleging fraud. It wants the county to reconcile its paper ballot logs with its machine count, and it wants the records kept until that's done. The Supreme Court hasn't ruled on the request.

This story will be updated with additional information as it becomes available.