SACRAMENTO, September 25 — The California Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco unlawfully seized hundreds of thousands of ballots from the state’s 2025 special election on Proposition 50, a decision that lands at the intersection of two escalating fights over American election administration. Governor Gavin Newsom responded the same day, saying the ruling affirms that California will defend democracy using every branch of government. The court’s decision in Cervantes v.
Bianco, issued September 24, 2026, determined the seizure was unlawful. No further detail on the court’s reasoning was included in the Governor’s statement.
The Seizure and the Case
According to the Governor’s office, Bianco seized the ballots in an attempt to claim and prove voter fraud. No evidence was ever provided. California leaders took him to court to hold him accountable.
The Governor’s office did not provide a specific number of ballots beyond “hundreds of thousands.” The special election at issue was for Proposition 50 and took place in 2025. Strategically, the calculus here is straightforward.
A county sheriff seizing ballots is not a routine law enforcement action — it is a direct challenge to the chain of custody that underpins vote-by-mail. When the state’s highest court rules the seizure unlawful, it reasserts that election administration sits with civil authorities, not with county law enforcement operating on unproven claims.
Newsom’s Legislative Response
The ruling came as Newsom signed a 13-bill election protection package the previous week, which his office described as building on his extensive record defending democracy. Newsom said the new laws add protections so attacks like this cannot happen again. He also said people deserve to know their ballot is counted and secure, and that California will do everything it can to protect that constitutional right this year and beyond.
The Governor’s statement did not name the specific bills in the package. The Governor’s office framed the court ruling and the new laws as part of a broader effort to protect elections, describing the seizure as an attack on democracy and the legislation as a means of preventing similar future attacks.
The Federal Dimension
The Governor’s office also noted that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against the Trump administration’s attempts to weaponize the U.S. Postal Service with regards to the vote-by-mail process. That ruling was not described in further detail. What this signals is a two-front defensive posture in California.
The state is hardening its election statutes at home while pointing to federal courts as a check on attempts to use federal machinery — in this case the Postal Service — against vote-by-mail. The statement was released in Sacramento, the state capital.
Watch for how the new laws are implemented ahead of the next statewide contest, and whether the Bianco case prompts similar challenges elsewhere. The broader stakes extend past California’s borders: if other jurisdictions test the same tactics, the legal ground laid down in Cervantes v. Bianco becomes the template for how states respond.
