Judge rules against 'America's toughest sheriff' in racial profiling lawsuit
by Tim Gaynor and David Schwartz
Arizona lawman Joe Arpaio violated the constitutional rights of Latino drivers in his crackdown on illegal immigration, a federal judge found on Friday, and ordered him to stop using race as a factor in law enforcement decisions.
The ruling against the Maricopa County sheriff
came in response to a class-action lawsuit brought by Hispanic drivers
that tested whether police can target illegal immigrants without
racially profiling U.S. citizens and legal residents of Hispanic origin.
U.S. District Court Judge Murray Snow
ruled that the sheriff's policies violated the drivers' constitutional
rights and ordered Arpaio's office to cease using race or ancestry as a
grounds to stop, detain or hold occupants of vehicles - some of them in
crime sweeps dubbed "saturation patrols."
"The great weight of the evidence is that all types of
saturation patrols at issue in this case incorporated race as a
consideration into their operations," Snow said in a written ruling.
He added that race had factored into which vehicles the
deputies decided to stop, and into who they decided to investigate for
immigration violations.
The lawsuit contended that Arpaio, who styles himself
"America's toughest sheriff," and his officers violated the
constitutional rights of both U.S. citizens and legal immigrants alike
in their zeal to crack down on people they believe to be in the country
illegally.
The ruling came days after a U.S. Senate panel approved
a landmark comprehensive immigration legislation that would usher in
the biggest changes in immigration policy in a generation if passed by
Congress.
The bill would put 11 million immigrants without legal
status on a 13-year path to citizenship while further strengthening
security along the porous southwestern border with Mexico.
Arpaio declined to comment on the ruling. An attorney
representing the sheriff's office said his clients were "deeply
disappointed by the ruling" and would lodge an appeal.
"The Maricopa County Sheriff's Office has always held
the position that they never have used race and never will use race in
making a law enforcement decision," attorney Tim Casey told Reuters.
"We do disagree with the findings and my clients do
intend to appeal, but at the same time ... we will work with the court
and with the opposing counsel to comply fully with the letter and the
spirit of this order," he added.
'ILLEGAL AND PLAIN UN-AMERICAN'
Cecillia Wang,
director of the American Civil Liberties Union Immigrants' Rights
Project and plaintiffs' counsel, called the judge's ruling "an important
victory that will resound far beyond Maricopa County."
"Singling people out for traffic stops and detentions
simply because they're Latino is illegal and just plain un-American,"
Wang said after the ruling was made public.
"Let this be a warning to anyone who hides behind a
badge to wage their own private campaign against Latinos or immigrants
that there is no exception in the Constitution for violating people's
rights in immigration enforcement."
During testimony in the non-jury trial last year,
Arpaio said he was against racial profiling and denied his office
arrested people because of the color of their skin.
The sheriff, who won re-election to a sixth term in
November, has been a lightning rod for controversy over his aggressive
enforcement of immigration laws in the state, which borders Mexico, as
well as an investigation into the validity of President Barack Obama's
U.S. birth certificate.
The lawsuit was brought against Arpaio and his office
on behalf of five Hispanic drivers who said they had been stopped by
deputies because of their ethnicity.
The plaintiffs, which include the Somos America
immigrants' rights coalition and all Latino drivers stopped by the
sheriff's office since 2007, were seeking corrective action but not
monetary damages.
Arpaio has been the subject of other probes and
lawsuits. In August, the U.S. Attorney's Office in Arizona said it had
closed a criminal investigation into accusations of financial misconduct
by Arpaio, and it declined to bring charges.
A separate U.S. Justice Department investigation and
lawsuit relating to accusations of civil rights abuses by Arpaio's
office is ongoing.
Arizona has been at the heart of a bitter national
debate over immigration since Republican Governor Jan Brewer signed a
2010 crackdown on illegal immigration.
The federal government challenged the crackdown in
court and said the U.S. Constitution gives it sole authority over
immigration policy. The U.S. Supreme Court, however, has allowed to
stand the part of the law permitting police to question people they stop
about their immigration status.
Snow scheduled a hearing in the case for June 14 at
9:30 a.m. at the Sandra Day O'Connor U.S. Federal Courthouse in Phoenix.