A federal judge has rejected an attempt by Maricopa County to end court supervision of its sheriff’s office, finding that authorities had not yet demonstrated that reforms following an historic racial-profiling ruling were sufficiently durable.
US District Judge Murray Snow originally found that Hispanic motorists had been unlawfully targeted during immigration-enforcement patrols conducted under former Sheriff Joe Arpaio. Court-ordered reforms subsequently affected traffic stops and the department’s internal-affairs processes.
County officials argued that Arpaio’s policies are long gone, that the Sheriff’s Office has undergone substantial reform and that continued monitoring imposes significant costs on taxpayers.
Snow, however, found that the evidence did not establish that all objectives of the earlier court orders had been achieved. He also questioned the methodology of traffic-stop studies relied upon by the county after certain longer stops were excluded from the analysis.
An expert for the plaintiffs found that Hispanic motorists experienced longer average stops than white drivers when a broader body of traffic-stop data was considered.
The judge left open the possibility that particular elements of the supervision order could be removed by agreement, while county officials indicated they intend to appeal.
The ruling illustrates the long lifespan of structural civil-rights litigation, where courts may retain jurisdiction years after the initial violation to determine whether institutional reforms are genuinely embedded.
Source: Associated Press
