News

Anti-Invader Sheriff Arpaio Convicted of “Disobeying Federal Judge’s Order” by Federal Judge

JOE ARPAIO, the former sheriff who garnered nationwide attention for his crackdown on illegal immigration, has been convicted of criminal contempt by a federal judge in Arizona. The ruling carries a possible maximum sentence of six months in jail and a monetary fine for the 85-year-old Arpaio.

The misdemeanor criminal conviction handed down Monday by District Judge Susan Bolton found that Arpaio knowingly violated a federal judge’s order in 2011. At that time, Arpaio was told he could not detain immigrants simply because they lacked legal status — but for 18 months, his deputies carried on with the practice.

NPR’s Richard Gonzales explained how the controversy unfolded:

“In December 2011, U.S. District Judge G. Murray Snow issued a preliminary injunction ordering Arpaio and his deputies to stop targeting Latino drivers. Prosecutors allege that Arpaio’s deputies defied the injunction for at least 18 months. In May 2013, Snow ruled that Arpaio’s office had engaged in racial profiling.

“Arpaio and his deputies have admitted to violating the judge’s order, but they claim their defiance wasn’t intentional.”

For these violations, Arpaio was found to have committed civil contempt. But Arpaio has long maintained he did not do so intentionally — and so is innocent of criminal contempt — because the judge’s order was unclear. As member station KJZZ notes, “his attorneys argued that the violations were a result of poor communication and a lack of understanding by Arpaio and his command staff.”

Now, Bolton has rejected Arpaio’s argument.

He “willfully violated the order by failing to do anything to ensure his subordinates’ compliance and by directing them to continue to detain persons for whom no criminal charges could be filed,” Bolton said in her decision.

During his 24 years as sheriff of Maricopa County, which contains the Phoenix metro area, the self-styled “America’s Toughest Sheriff” found plaudits in many conservative circles for his severe enforcement policies — and deep criticism from others who said his practices amounted to racial profiling. That long tenure ultimately ended last November when he lost his re-election bid, just two weeks after being slapped with the criminal contempt charge.

“Arpaio’s supporters believe this criminal case is really about politics — Democrats trying to hurt a Republican sheriff,” Jude Joffe-Block and Amita Kelly reported for NPR last month. “Those supporters hoped the Trump administration would drop the criminal case” — but federal prosecutors continued to press forward anyway.

* * *

Source: NPR

For Further Reading

Previous post

NBC, Comcast, and What We're Really Up Against

Next post

The French Election Was Rigged

1 Comment

  1. James Clayton
    August 1, 2017 at 4:58 am — Reply

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arizona_SB_1070

    … The Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act (introduced as Arizona Senate Bill 1070 and thus often referred to simply as Arizona SB 1070) is a 2010 legislative Act in the U.S. state of Arizona that at the time of passage in 2010 was the broadest and strictest anti-illegal immigration measure passed in Arizona.[2] It has received national and international attention and has spurred considerable controversy.[3][4]
    U.S. federal law requires all aliens over the age of 14 who remain in the United States for longer than 30 days[5] to register with the U.S. government,[6] and to have registration documents in their possession at all times; violation of this requirement is a federal misdemeanor crime.[7] The Arizona act additionally made it a state misdemeanor crime for an alien to be in Arizona without carrying the required documents,[8] required that state law enforcement officers attempt to determine an individual’s immigration status during a “lawful stop, detention or arrest”, when there is reasonable suspicion that the individual is an illegal immigrant.[9][10] The law barred state or local officials or agencies from restricting enforcement of federal immigration laws,[11] and imposed penalties on those sheltering, hiring and transporting unregistered aliens.[12] The paragraph on intent in the legislation says it embodies an “attrition through enforcement” doctrine.[13][14]…

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Slander, crude language, incivility, off-topic drift, or remarks that might harm National Vanguard or its users may be edited or deleted, even if unintentional. Comments may be edited for clarity or usage.