Joe Arpaio's Doomsday: Arpaio Loses ACLU Civil Rights Lawsuit, MCSO Enjoined from Racially Profiling

Discussion in 'Civil Rights & Privacy' started by Mike, May 27, 2013.

  1. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    The verdict (and restraining order) are in -- the Feathered Bastard is now enjoined from profiling Hispanics:

    Phoenix New Times Blog: Joe Arpaio's Doomsday: Arpaio Loses ACLU Civil Rights Lawsuit, MCSO Enjoined from Racially Profiling Latinos

    U.S. District Judge G. Murray Snow just handed the ACLU, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, the law firm Covington & Burling, all Latinos, and everyone who has strived for justice in Maricopa County a reason to celebrate over the long holiday weekend by ruling against Sheriff Joe Arpaio in the big Melendres v. Arpaio racial-profiling lawsuit.

    Essentially, Snow found that the MCSO does engage in racial profiling and discrimination, and he has ordered it to stop.
     
  2. Doober

    Doober Original Member

    Sadly, it won't stop the b**ard from any of his other abuses.
     
  3. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    It's a start. Unfortunately he'll probably die of old age before things are straightened out & fully constitutional in Maricopa County.
     
  4. Frank

    Frank Original Member

    It won't stop him for this, either. He already sent out a press release that effectively said "(expletive deleted) you, Judge Asstard". Maybe the judge will send federal marshals to take him in for contempt.
     
  5. Caradoc

    Caradoc Original Member

    Y'all are aware that Arpaio has been repeatedly re-elected by the local constituency, right? While it's currently in vogue to hate on Arpaio, he's really just a symptom of the endemic racism in the area.
     
  6. RB

    RB Founding Member

    If they take Arpaio in for contempt will they also take Holder in for contempt of the Constitution?
     
  7. Caradoc

    Caradoc Original Member

    Lois Lerner?
     
    Elizabeth Conley likes this.
  8. RB

    RB Founding Member

    Kinda sad that the Justice Department can call anyone out giving the track record of Obama's administration.
     
    nachtnebel and Elizabeth Conley like this.
  9. Frank

    Frank Original Member

    Well, yeah. His re-election campain basically boils down to "Vote for me, I'm the only one standing between the brown horde of rapists and your granddaughters."
     
    Caradoc likes this.
  10. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    The press release didn't work. As of yesterday, the toughest sheriff in the West has a federal babysitter monitor.

    Dashboard cams in cop cars are yesterday's technology. Judges today should be upping the ante by also requiring body cameras.

    There's a lot more in the Arizona Republic article, if you interested, including how Sheriff Joe managed not to comply with a 1981 court order regarding jail conditions for 27+ years. (yes, that's "27+", not it's not a typo)

    Arizona Republic: Racial-profiling lawsuit ruling: Judge imposes conditions on Arpaio, Sheriff's Office (Oct 2 2013)

    On Wednesday, Snow issued a follow-up ruling that maps out the future for day-to-day operations of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office. That future includes cameras in every deputy’s car, increased data collection and reporting, a community-advisory board, and a court-appointed monitor to ensure the agency is taking steps to prevent discrimination now and in the future. The Sheriff’s Office will appeal the ruling but continue to try to comply with the court order while the appeal is pending, according to Arpaio’s attorney. If an appeal fails, the agency will have to demonstrate complete compliance with the ruling — which will likely take at least a year for the Sheriff’s Office to achieve. The office then would have to maintain complete compliance for three consecutive years before the court-ordered oversight is lifted.

    ...

    Snow delivered just about everything the plaintiffs, represented by the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona, had asked for with the ruling that was issued Wednesday, said Dan Pochoda, the group’s legal director. The ruling included some immediate changes to sheriff’s policies that reinforce existing court injunctions against deputies detaining people based purely on a suspect’s “unlawful presence” in the country without any other violations. The ruling also prohibits deputies from engaging in “pre-textual” traffic stops to engage in immigration screening, such as stopping cars for broken taillights to question the driver and passengers about their status — a hallmark of Arpaio’s controversial immigration raids. Deputies will also need to articulate a reason for their traffic stops as soon as they pull the car over, unless there are “exigent circumstances,” Snow ruled in another nod to the ACLU, which argued that point with the Sheriff’s Office in a recent round of court filings.
     
    Last edited: Oct 3, 2013
  11. RB

    RB Founding Member

    Sheriff Joe kept being elected in his county which tells me the majority of voters agreed with his actions. Old Joe is well into his 80's and not likely to be able to keep running for sheriff so I see him exiting in the next few years which will be a loss for those of us who stand against illegal immigration.
     
  12. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    Sheriff Joe stands for abuse and violation of people's civil rights. His immigration stance is nothing but a sideshow to detract from the real problems and abuses that his department inflicts on people day in & day out.

    The ACLU lawsuit started when a Mexican tourist in the U.S. legally was detained by Sheriff Joe's cronies illegally for nine hours. Getting rid of such abusive cops and their overseers is not a loss to anyone.
     
    Sunny Goth likes this.
  13. Sunny Goth

    Sunny Goth Original Member Coach

    That's pretty much how I see it too.
     

Share This Page