A coalition of media organizations, including the California Newspapers Partnership, ABC News, and The New York Times, filed a motion on Wednesday, April 1, to unseal records related to an investigation by the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department into the 2022 election.

Public Access to Election Records Sought

The media coalition argues that the public has a right to access search warrants and supporting documentation related to the seizure of over 650,000 ballots. Their filing requests the unsealing of “all documents and records relating” to the investigation’s three search warrants, as well as any other judicial records in the matter.

Arguments for Transparency

Frank Pine, executive editor of the Southern California News Group and the Bay Area News Group, stated, “If there is evidence of wrongdoing or vote tampering, there should absolutely be an investigation. But that investigation should be conducted openly and transparently so that the public can be confident in the security and integrity of our elections.”

The coalition maintains that the public interest in transparency outweighs any justification for keeping the records sealed. They contend that arguments about potential harm from disclosure are negated by public statements already made by the Attorney General and the Sheriff.

Background of the Investigation

The investigation stems from claims made by the Riverside Election Integrity Team, a citizen’s election watchdog group, alleging a discrepancy of approximately 45,000 votes between ballots cast and ballots counted in Riverside County. Art Tinoco, Riverside County Registrar of Voters, refuted these claims in a presentation to the Board of Supervisors on February 10, stating the actual gap was only 103 votes – within the acceptable margin of error.

Sheriff's Actions and Legal Challenges

Despite Tinoco’s findings, Sheriff Chad Bianco obtained search warrants for Proposition 50 ballots and related election materials. Bianco announced on March 20 that his office would recount the ballots under the supervision of a court-appointed special master.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta has challenged the investigation in both the California Supreme Court and superior court, arguing that the sheriff’s search warrants lacked sufficient evidence of a crime and that Bianco defied directives to coordinate with his office. Bonta asserts the state constitution grants him authority over sheriffs.

Legal Positions

The media coalition “takes no position” on the dispute between Bianco and Bonta. However, they argue that regardless of who is correct, the search warrant documents must be made public. Robert Tyler, Bianco’s lawyer, maintains the Sheriff’s Department believes the evidence presented justifies the search warrants and suggests a fair probability of finding evidence of a crime.

The coalition’s lawyers wrote that the public “should not be forced to navigate” the “competing allegations” without access to the underlying facts. They emphasize that all judicial records related to the matter should be unsealed in accordance with California law.