Sheriff Joe Arpaio speaking at the Arizona Republican Party 2014 election victory party at the Hyatt Regency in Phoenix, Arizona. (Photo: Gage Skidmore/flickr/cc)
May 14, 2016
Notorious Arizona sheriff Joe Arpaio, found guilty in 2013 of racial profiling and violating Latinos' constitutional rights, has now been found in contempt of court for failing to curtail those practices and in fact flouting the judge's orders.
The ruling on Friday from U.S. District Judge Murray Snow "marked one of the biggest legal defeats" in Arpaio's career, wrote the Associated Press, and was expected to lead to greater court oversight of his office.
USA Today reports that the contempt proceedings were based on three alleged violations:
- That the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office failed to turn over video evidence required before the racial-profiling trial.
- That officials continued to enforce immigration law after Snow barred the practice.
- That [Chief Deputy Jerry] Sheridan failed to quietly collect evidence after the trial, as Snow had ordered him to do.
Three of Arpaio's top aides were also found in contempt.
"In short, the court finds that the defendants have engaged in multiple acts of misconduct, dishonesty, and bad faith with respect to the plaintiff class and the protection of its rights," Snow wrote in a 162-page finding of fact in the case.
For example, the Arizona Republic reports, "Snow found that deputies had detained and turned over to federal authorities at least 157 individuals who had not committed state crimes, in violation of his order."
Furthermore, Snow ripped into Arpaio's motives for his flagrant violations: "Sheriff Arpaio knowingly ignored the Court's order because he believed that his popularity resulted, at least in part, from his enforcement of immigration laws.... He also believed that it resulted in generous donations to his campaign."
A hearing has been set for May 31, at which point Snow's court will "enter any applicable orders and determine if it will refer any matters for criminal contempt."
That could have major implications, the Phoenix New Times reports:
Paul Charlton, former U.S. Attorney for Arizona, says the judge's language signals the possibility that Arpaio's case will be referred for criminal prosecution. In April of last year, Charlton notes, Sheridan and Arpaio admitted they were guilty of civil contempt in a bid to stop the trial.
Snow didn't bite.
[...] Criminal contempt of court is defined by federal statute as "willful disobedience" of the court's lawful orders and is punishable by up to six months in prison. A punishment for civil contempt would be coercive rather than punitive in nature, and might involve fines or other sanctions meant to ensure compliance.
The ACLU, which brought the original lawsuit against Arpaio, said the ruling meant that "willing or not, the sheriff will be made to comply with the law."
"The court has found that Sheriff Arpaio intentionally and repeatedly violated federal court orders," said Cecillia Wang, director of the ACLU's Immigrants' Rights Project. "His recalcitrance ends here."
The Maricopa County sheriff is currently running for re-election. He has endorsed Donald Trump for president.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Our Summer Campaign is now underway, and there’s never been a more urgent time for Common Dreams to be as vigilant as possible. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Deirdre Fulton
Deirdre Fulton is a former Common Dreams senior editor and staff writer. Previously she worked as an editor and writer for the Portland Phoenix and the Boston Phoenix, where she was honored by the New England Press Association and the Association of Alternative Newsweeklies. A Boston University graduate, Deirdre is a co-founder of the Maine-based Lorem Ipsum Theater Collective and the PortFringe theater festival. She writes young adult fiction in her spare time.
Notorious Arizona sheriff Joe Arpaio, found guilty in 2013 of racial profiling and violating Latinos' constitutional rights, has now been found in contempt of court for failing to curtail those practices and in fact flouting the judge's orders.
The ruling on Friday from U.S. District Judge Murray Snow "marked one of the biggest legal defeats" in Arpaio's career, wrote the Associated Press, and was expected to lead to greater court oversight of his office.
USA Today reports that the contempt proceedings were based on three alleged violations:
- That the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office failed to turn over video evidence required before the racial-profiling trial.
- That officials continued to enforce immigration law after Snow barred the practice.
- That [Chief Deputy Jerry] Sheridan failed to quietly collect evidence after the trial, as Snow had ordered him to do.
Three of Arpaio's top aides were also found in contempt.
"In short, the court finds that the defendants have engaged in multiple acts of misconduct, dishonesty, and bad faith with respect to the plaintiff class and the protection of its rights," Snow wrote in a 162-page finding of fact in the case.
For example, the Arizona Republic reports, "Snow found that deputies had detained and turned over to federal authorities at least 157 individuals who had not committed state crimes, in violation of his order."
Furthermore, Snow ripped into Arpaio's motives for his flagrant violations: "Sheriff Arpaio knowingly ignored the Court's order because he believed that his popularity resulted, at least in part, from his enforcement of immigration laws.... He also believed that it resulted in generous donations to his campaign."
A hearing has been set for May 31, at which point Snow's court will "enter any applicable orders and determine if it will refer any matters for criminal contempt."
That could have major implications, the Phoenix New Times reports:
Paul Charlton, former U.S. Attorney for Arizona, says the judge's language signals the possibility that Arpaio's case will be referred for criminal prosecution. In April of last year, Charlton notes, Sheridan and Arpaio admitted they were guilty of civil contempt in a bid to stop the trial.
Snow didn't bite.
[...] Criminal contempt of court is defined by federal statute as "willful disobedience" of the court's lawful orders and is punishable by up to six months in prison. A punishment for civil contempt would be coercive rather than punitive in nature, and might involve fines or other sanctions meant to ensure compliance.
The ACLU, which brought the original lawsuit against Arpaio, said the ruling meant that "willing or not, the sheriff will be made to comply with the law."
"The court has found that Sheriff Arpaio intentionally and repeatedly violated federal court orders," said Cecillia Wang, director of the ACLU's Immigrants' Rights Project. "His recalcitrance ends here."
The Maricopa County sheriff is currently running for re-election. He has endorsed Donald Trump for president.
Deirdre Fulton
Deirdre Fulton is a former Common Dreams senior editor and staff writer. Previously she worked as an editor and writer for the Portland Phoenix and the Boston Phoenix, where she was honored by the New England Press Association and the Association of Alternative Newsweeklies. A Boston University graduate, Deirdre is a co-founder of the Maine-based Lorem Ipsum Theater Collective and the PortFringe theater festival. She writes young adult fiction in her spare time.
Notorious Arizona sheriff Joe Arpaio, found guilty in 2013 of racial profiling and violating Latinos' constitutional rights, has now been found in contempt of court for failing to curtail those practices and in fact flouting the judge's orders.
The ruling on Friday from U.S. District Judge Murray Snow "marked one of the biggest legal defeats" in Arpaio's career, wrote the Associated Press, and was expected to lead to greater court oversight of his office.
USA Today reports that the contempt proceedings were based on three alleged violations:
- That the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office failed to turn over video evidence required before the racial-profiling trial.
- That officials continued to enforce immigration law after Snow barred the practice.
- That [Chief Deputy Jerry] Sheridan failed to quietly collect evidence after the trial, as Snow had ordered him to do.
Three of Arpaio's top aides were also found in contempt.
"In short, the court finds that the defendants have engaged in multiple acts of misconduct, dishonesty, and bad faith with respect to the plaintiff class and the protection of its rights," Snow wrote in a 162-page finding of fact in the case.
For example, the Arizona Republic reports, "Snow found that deputies had detained and turned over to federal authorities at least 157 individuals who had not committed state crimes, in violation of his order."
Furthermore, Snow ripped into Arpaio's motives for his flagrant violations: "Sheriff Arpaio knowingly ignored the Court's order because he believed that his popularity resulted, at least in part, from his enforcement of immigration laws.... He also believed that it resulted in generous donations to his campaign."
A hearing has been set for May 31, at which point Snow's court will "enter any applicable orders and determine if it will refer any matters for criminal contempt."
That could have major implications, the Phoenix New Times reports:
Paul Charlton, former U.S. Attorney for Arizona, says the judge's language signals the possibility that Arpaio's case will be referred for criminal prosecution. In April of last year, Charlton notes, Sheridan and Arpaio admitted they were guilty of civil contempt in a bid to stop the trial.
Snow didn't bite.
[...] Criminal contempt of court is defined by federal statute as "willful disobedience" of the court's lawful orders and is punishable by up to six months in prison. A punishment for civil contempt would be coercive rather than punitive in nature, and might involve fines or other sanctions meant to ensure compliance.
The ACLU, which brought the original lawsuit against Arpaio, said the ruling meant that "willing or not, the sheriff will be made to comply with the law."
"The court has found that Sheriff Arpaio intentionally and repeatedly violated federal court orders," said Cecillia Wang, director of the ACLU's Immigrants' Rights Project. "His recalcitrance ends here."
The Maricopa County sheriff is currently running for re-election. He has endorsed Donald Trump for president.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.