Sheriff SEIZES 650,000 Ballots—Stuns California Officials

March 23, 2026

Person casting a vote into a transparent ballot box during an election

A Republican sheriff running for California governor has seized over 650,000 ballots from last year’s election in an unprecedented move that has pitted law enforcement against state officials in a battle over election integrity and proper authority.

Story Snapshot

Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco seized more than 650,000 ballots to investigate alleged fraud despite official audit showing only 103-ballot discrepancy
California Attorney General threatens legal action, calling the seizure “unprecedented in both scope and scale” with no precedent in U.S. election administration
Citizens group claimed 45,896 excess ballots, but county registrar’s official analysis contradicted this claim as “provably false”
Court-appointed special master now oversees ballot count as investigation continues four months before Bianco appears on gubernatorial ballot

Sheriff Takes Unprecedented Action on Election Materials

Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco executed warrants on February 26, 2026, seizing approximately 1,000 boxes containing more than 650,000 ballots from November 2025’s election. The materials related to Proposition 50, which temporarily redrew California’s congressional districts and passed with 56% in Riverside County and 64% statewide. Bianco stated his department would “physically count the ballots and compare that result with the total votes recorded.” The seizure removes election materials from standard chain-of-custody protocols, potentially violating California law requiring election officials to maintain custody for months after elections.

Official Audit Contradicts Fraud Allegations

The Riverside Election Integrity Team, a citizens group, alleged 45,896 more ballots were counted than cast in the November 2025 election. However, Riverside County Registrar of Voters Art Tinoco presented data on February 10, 2026, showing the actual discrepancy was only 103 ballots—a variance of 0.016%. This figure falls well within acceptable margins of error and below California’s 2% threshold. The 445-fold difference between the citizens group’s claim and the official audit raises serious questions about the basis for the investigation. Despite these findings, Bianco proceeded with the ballot seizure investigation.

State Officials Challenge Sheriff’s Authority

California Attorney General Rob Bonta sent a letter to Bianco on March 4, 2026, threatening legal recourse if the investigation continued. Bonta stated definitively that there is “no indication, anywhere in the United States, of widespread voter fraud” and noted that “counts, recounts, hand counts, audits, and court cases all support this.” Secretary of State Shirley Weber criticized the investigation, emphasizing that sheriff’s deputies lack “expertise in election administration.” Bonta’s office has attempted to obtain documents and affidavits supporting the warrant but reports the sheriff’s department has not cooperated in good faith.

Judicial Oversight Imposed Amid Continuing Investigation

A Riverside County Superior Court judge ordered the appointment of a special master to oversee the ballot count, addressing concerns about untrained sheriff’s deputies conducting the recount. The warrants for the ballot seizure remain sealed, limiting public transparency about the probable cause and evidence justifying the action. Bianco maintains that “there is no acceptable error, small or large, in our elections” and characterizes the effort as verification rather than recount. The investigation continues as Bianco campaigns for California governor, with the election less than four months away.

This is our new normal.

California sheriff running for governor seizes more than a half million ballots from 2025 election https://t.co/2RoU4yZiun

— Luis Viera (@CouncilmanViera) March 23, 2026

This situation represents a fundamental clash between law enforcement authority and election administration expertise. Election officials and legal experts characterize this seizure as having no precedent in U.S. election administration. The investigation’s outcome could establish whether law enforcement can seize election materials without traditional election administration oversight, potentially affecting how other jurisdictions handle election materials nationwide. For voters concerned about election integrity and proper governmental authority, this case highlights the importance of maintaining clear lines of jurisdiction and requiring substantial evidence before extraordinary interventions into certified election results.