California Supreme Court considers return of seized ballots

The California Supreme Court heard arguments on whether Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco must return roughly 650,000 ballots seized during the 2025 redistricting election and whether the sheriff acted within his authority to pursue a separate investigation outside the normal election process. Plaintiffs led by UCLA Voting Rights Project argue Bianco violated election law by seizing ballots from the registrar and bypassing established procedures. California Attorney General Rob Bonta contends the sheriff had no authority over election materials and should halt the investigation to protect trust in elections. Bianco’s supporters maintain he followed his legal duty to investigate after receiving a complaint and conducted warrants, though a court-appointed special master later suspended a recount. The cases also raise questions about who controls ballots after an election and the extent of the attorney general’s power to stop a sheriff’s actions. A decision could reshape how election materials are handled and how sheriff-led inquiries interact with state election law in California.