Joe Arpaio: Lawbreaker Or Lawman?

Joe Arpaio, the former sheriff of Maricopa County, Arizona, has been accused and found guilty of breaking several laws. Arpaio was convicted of criminal contempt of court in 2017 for ignoring a judge's order to stop his immigration patrols, which were found to have racially profiled Latinos. He was pardoned by then-President Donald Trump. Arpaio has also been accused of police misconduct, including abuse of power, misuse of funds, failure to investigate sex crimes, criminal negligence, abuse of suspects, and unlawful enforcement of immigration laws. He has been the subject of several federal civil rights lawsuits and has cost taxpayers in Maricopa County over $140 million in litigation during his tenure as sheriff.

Joe Arpaio's mistreatment of undocumented immigrants

Joe Arpaio, the former sheriff of Maricopa County, Arizona, gained notoriety for his harsh treatment of undocumented immigrants. Arpaio's tenure as sheriff, which lasted from 1993 to 2017, was marked by a series of controversial policies and actions that targeted undocumented immigrants, particularly those of Latino descent.

One of Arpaio's most infamous practices was the use of saturation patrols or immigration sweeps, where deputies would stop Latino drivers and passengers for minor traffic violations and arrest those without valid identification or documentation. These operations, often conducted in collaboration with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), led to the detention and deportation of many undocumented immigrants, causing widespread fear and trauma within the immigrant community.

Arpaio also instituted a Tent City jail, which he himself described as a "concentration camp," where inmates were subjected to extreme heat, inadequate meals, and inhumane living conditions. He mandated that inmates wear pink underwear, which he later sold as a fundraiser, and implemented other punitive measures such as limiting meals to twice a day and banning sexually explicit material.

In addition to his controversial detention practices, Arpaio was accused of failing to properly investigate serious crimes, including hundreds of sex crimes and child molestations. Many of the victims in these cases were children of undocumented immigrants. Arpaio's office was also criticized for its handling of rape kits and for failing to follow up on known suspects.

The consequences of Arpaio's actions extended beyond the direct mistreatment of undocumented immigrants. His policies had a chilling effect on the Latino community as a whole, with American citizens of Latino descent feeling targeted and living in fear of being wrongfully stopped or questioned due to their ethnicity.

Arpaio's actions led to numerous lawsuits and investigations. He was found to have engaged in racial profiling, unlawful discriminatory police conduct, and contempt of court. Despite the serious allegations and legal repercussions, Arpaio remained defiant, often welcoming the media attention that his controversial policies garnered.

Arpaio's racial profiling and discrimination against Latinos

Joe Arpaio, the former sheriff of Maricopa County, Arizona, has been accused of racial profiling and discrimination against Latinos. Arpaio's controversial policies and practices have resulted in numerous lawsuits, civil rights violations, and significant financial costs for taxpayers.

Arpaio's signature traffic patrol policy, known as "sweeps," targeted Latino neighborhoods and day laborers as part of his crackdown on illegal immigration. In 2013, a federal judge concluded that the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office had engaged in racial profiling and discrimination against Latinos in these traffic patrols, violating their constitutional rights. This decision led to court-ordered overhauls of the agency's traffic operations and internal affairs department, with compliance costs expected to reach hundreds of millions of dollars.

The US Department of Justice's investigation in 2011 also found that Arpaio oversaw the worst pattern of racial profiling in US history, with Latino drivers four to nine times more likely to be stopped than non-Latino drivers. Arpaio's office was also accused of retaliating against critics, subjecting them to baseless detentions, arrests, and lawsuits.

Arpaio's immigration patrols involved large numbers of deputies converging on areas of metro Phoenix, including Latino neighborhoods, to stop traffic violators and arrest other offenders. These operations were conducted from 2008 to 2013, continuing even after a judge's order to stop in 2011, which led to Arpaio's conviction for criminal contempt of court.

The financial impact of Arpaio's racial profiling practices has been significant. As of 2024, taxpayers in Maricopa County were facing legal and compliance costs exceeding $300 million due to the racial profiling lawsuit. This includes funding for hiring additional staff to meet court requirements and monitor the sheriff's office's compliance with overhauls.

In addition to the financial toll, Arpaio's actions have had a profound human cost. His policies resulted in the inhumane treatment of detainees, with prisoners forced to wear pink underwear and endure harsh conditions in outdoor "tent cities." Arpaio also failed to properly investigate hundreds of sex crimes, including child molestations, many involving undocumented immigrants.

The US Justice Department's investigation of Arpaio

The US Justice Department's investigation of Joe Arpaio began in 2008, amid accusations of discrimination and unconstitutional searches and seizures. Arpaio, the former sheriff of Maricopa County, Arizona, was investigated for racial profiling and civil rights violations. Arpaio refused to cooperate with the investigation, withholding records from federal officials and stalling the probe for 17 months.

The Justice Department filed a lawsuit against Arpaio and the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office (MCSO) in September 2010 for refusing full cooperation with the investigation. The department alleged that the MCSO had violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination in programs that receive federal funds. The MCSO had signed contractual assurance agreements promising to cooperate with investigations of alleged discrimination as a condition of receiving federal funds.

In December 2011, the Justice Department released its findings, concluding that Arpaio and the MCSO had committed a wide range of civil rights violations against Latinos, including racial profiling and discrimination in immigration patrols. The report stated that the MCSO had a ""pervasive culture of discriminatory bias against Latinos" that "reaches the highest levels of the agency."

In May 2012, the Justice Department filed a lawsuit against Arpaio, the MCSO, and Maricopa County, alleging unlawful discriminatory police conduct directed at Latinos in Maricopa County and jail practices that discriminated against Latino prisoners. The lawsuit accused Arpaio and his staff of forcing women to sleep in their menstrual blood, assaulting pregnant women, ignoring rape, and criminalizing being Latino.

In June 2015, a federal judge entered a partial summary judgment for the Justice Department on the central racial-profiling allegations in the suit. In July 2015, Maricopa County's board of supervisors voted to settle the lawsuit.

In addition to the Justice Department investigation, Arpaio was also the subject of several federal civil rights lawsuits and was accused of numerous types of police misconduct, including abuse of power, misuse of funds, failure to investigate sex crimes, and criminal negligence. He was convicted of criminal contempt of court in July 2017 for violating court orders related to racial profiling but was pardoned by President Donald Trump in August 2017.

Arpaio's abuse of power and targeting of political enemies

Joe Arpaio, the former sheriff of Maricopa County, Arizona, has been accused of abuse of power and targeting political enemies.

Arpaio was accused of retaliating against political enemies at various times. He was dogged for years by claims that he launched investigations into judges, politicians, and others who were at odds with him. Arpaio's office arrested two county officials and a judge on corruption charges that quickly collapsed in court. Maricopa County agreed to pay $8.7 million to settle lawsuits by people who said they were investigated on trumped-up allegations. Arpaio contended he was trying to root out corruption. He was also accused of investigating the judge who presided over a racial profiling case against the sheriff's office and whose order Arpaio ignored, leading to his conviction. Arpaio vigorously denied the allegation.

Between 2008 and 2010, Arpaio and former Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas undertook a number of government corruption investigations targeting political opponents, including judges, county supervisors, and administrators. These investigations resulted in lawsuits and criminal charges against several individuals. Arpaio and Thomas lost every case, either by ruling of the courts or by dropping the case.

Arpaio's actions in these matters led to Thomas' disbarment by a disciplinary panel of the Arizona Supreme Court, which found that Thomas "outrageously exploited power, flagrantly fostered fear, and disgracefully misused the law" while serving as Maricopa County Attorney. The panel found "clear and convincing evidence" that Thomas brought unfounded and malicious criminal and civil charges against political opponents, including four state judges and the Arizona Attorney General.

At least 11 individuals filed lawsuits or legal claims as a result of being targeted by Arpaio and Thomas. The county settled all 11 cases, with total costs exceeding $44 million.

In addition to targeting political opponents, Arpaio was also accused of abusing his power in other ways. He was accused of intimidating supposed enemies, including a judge's spouse, a political rival, a county official, and a reporter. The Justice Department also found that his office "engaged in a pattern or practice of retaliating against individuals for exercising their First Amendment right to free speech," as deputies tried "to silence individuals who have publicly spoken out and participated in protected demonstrations" against Arpaio.

Arpaio was also accused of abuse of power in connection with an FBI investigation. A federal grand jury began an inquiry into Arpaio for abuse of power, and he was investigated for politically motivated and "bogus" prosecutions, which a former US Attorney called "utterly unacceptable." Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon called Arpaio's "long list" of questionable prosecutions "a reign of terror."

The targets of Arpaio's alleged abuse of power included:

• Phil Gordon, Phoenix Mayor
• Dan Saban, Arpaio's 2004 and 2008 opponent for the office of Sheriff of Maricopa County
• Terry Goddard, Arizona Attorney General
• David Smith, Maricopa County Manager
• The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors
• Barbara Mundell, Maricopa Superior Court Presiding Judge
• Anna Baca, former Maricopa Superior Court Presiding Judge
• Gary Donahoe, Maricopa Superior Court Criminal Presiding Judge
• Daniel Pochoda, ACLU attorney
• Sandra Dowling, former Maricopa County School Superintendent
• Mike Lacey, Editor, Phoenix New Times

Arpaio's botched sex crimes investigations

Joe Arpaio, the former sheriff of Maricopa County, Arizona, has been accused of botching or failing to investigate hundreds of sex crimes, including child molestation cases, during his tenure.

From 2004 to 2007, Arpaio's office inadequately investigated or failed to investigate more than 400 sex crimes reported to his office, including dozens of alleged child molestations. In El Mirage, Arizona, where Arpaio provided contract services, he failed to follow through on at least 32 reported child molestations, even though the suspects were known in all but six cases. Many of the victims were undocumented immigrants.

One case involved a 13-year-old girl, Sabrina Morrison, who was raped by her uncle, Patrick Morrison, in 2007. A rape kit was taken, but the detective assigned to the case told Sabrina and her family that there were no obvious signs of sexual assault, no semen, or signs of trauma. As a result, Sabrina was branded a liar by her family, and her uncle continued to rape her repeatedly, threatening to kill her if she told anyone. She became pregnant and had an abortion.

Unbeknownst to the family, the rape kit had been tested and showed the presence of semen. The lab requested that the detective obtain a blood sample from Patrick Morrison, but instead of doing so, the detective filed the crime lab note and closed the case for four years. In 2011, a blood sample was finally obtained from Patrick Morrison, which matched the semen from the rape kit. He was arrested, charged, pleaded guilty, and sentenced to 24 years in prison. In 2015, the case was settled for $3.5 million.

An internal memo written by one of the detectives assigned to the Morrison case blamed a high caseload, saying the special victims unit had gone from five detectives to just three, and that the remaining detectives were often called off their cases to investigate special assignments. When county supervisors provided funding for six additional detective positions to investigate child abuse in 2007, none were added to the sex crimes squad.

Arpaio's failure to properly investigate sex crimes, including child molestations, has been widely criticized and contributed to his defeat in the 2016 election for Maricopa County Sheriff.

Frequently asked questions