California Supreme Court orders Riverside County sheriff to pause election ballot investigation

The court's decision comes after the state's attorney general filed a legal challenge to the sheriff's probe into the 2025 Proposition 50 special election.

Apr. 8, 2026 at 7:10pm

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

A quiet, cinematic painting of an empty government building in California, with warm sunlight and deep shadows creating a sense of political tension and uncertainty.The California Supreme Court's decision to pause a controversial election investigation highlights the delicate balance between election integrity and the potential for politically motivated probes.Riverside Today

The California Supreme Court has ordered Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco to pause his investigation into the 2025 Proposition 50 special election, which saw voters overwhelmingly approve a congressional redistricting plan spearheaded by Gov. Gavin Newsom. The court's decision comes after state Attorney General Rob Bonta filed a legal challenge to the sheriff's seizure of more than 611,000 ballots from the election.

Why it matters

The sheriff's investigation has raised concerns about undermining public confidence in the integrity of California's elections, with the state's top election official warning that the probe risks destabilizing the electoral process. The Supreme Court's intervention is seen as a necessary check on the sheriff's actions, which some have characterized as politically motivated.

The details

Bianco's office seized the ballots after a local Riverside County group alleged a possible discrepancy of about 45,800 votes between the California Secretary of State's count and the votes counted by electronic machines. However, local election officials say the actual discrepancy is much closer to 100 votes. Bianco has described the investigation as a "fact-finding mission" to physically count the ballots and compare the results to the reported totals.

  • On April 8, 2026, the California Supreme Court ordered Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco to pause his investigation into the 2025 Proposition 50 special election.
  • In March 2026, Bianco's office seized more than 611,000 ballots from the 2025 election.

The players

Chad Bianco

The Riverside County Sheriff, who is one of two major Republican candidates in the upcoming June 2026 California gubernatorial primary election.

Rob Bonta

The California Attorney General, who filed a legal challenge to Bianco's investigation and welcomed the Supreme Court's decision to intervene.

Shirley Weber

The California Secretary of State, who has warned that Bianco's investigation risks "undermining public confidence in our elections."

Riverside County Registrar of Voters

The local election officials who say the actual vote-counting discrepancy is much closer to 100 than the more than 45,000 that the sheriff alleges.

Gavin Newsom

The California Governor, whose congressional redistricting plan was approved by voters in the 2025 Proposition 50 special election that is now the subject of the sheriff's investigation.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“What the Sheriff says and what he does are often two different things. Today's decision by the California Supreme Court reins in the destabilizing actions of a rogue Sheriff, prohibiting him from continuing this investigation while our litigation continues.”

— Rob Bonta, California Attorney General

“This investigation is simple: Physically count the ballots and compare that result with the total votes reported.”

— Chad Bianco, Riverside County Sheriff

“The Supreme Court has also agreed to review this case on the merits — a necessary and appropriate response to what is a clearly an unprecedented situation.”

— Rob Bonta, California Attorney General

What’s next

The California Supreme Court will review the state's legal challenge to the sheriff's investigation, and the Riverside County Registrar of Voters will continue to comply with all lawful court orders and legal obligations related to the election materials and administration.

The takeaway

This case highlights the delicate balance between election integrity and the potential for politically motivated investigations that could undermine public trust in the democratic process. The Supreme Court's intervention is seen as a crucial safeguard against actions that could destabilize California's electoral system.