Joe Arpaio's Lawyers Fail to Get Sheriff Off the Hook in Justice Department Lawsuit

arpaio-reelection-side.jpg
Photo by Matthew Hendley
Sheriff Joe Arpaio
Lawyers for Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio have failed in their attempt to get the Justice Department's racial-discrimination lawsuit tossed.

Chief U.S. District Judge Roslyn Silver made a ruling this week on the June motion to throw out the suit against Arpaio, the Sheriff's Office, and the county. Only MCSO is being dismissed from the case, since it's a "governmental entity" -- which leaves the county on the hook for any MCSO misdeeds.

See also:
-Joe Arpaio Lawyers: Discriminating Against Spanish-Speakers Doesn't Violate Civil Rights
-Joe Arpaio, MCSO Sued by Justice Department for Racial Discrimination
-Joe Arpaio's Office Commits Worst Racial Profiling in U.S. History, Concludes DOJ

Perhaps the most interesting claim from Arpaio's lawyers in the motion to dismiss was that discrimination against people who speak a certain language isn't a civil-rights violation.

The lawsuit itself focuses on discriminatory policing against Latinos, and alleges that the practices at the jails discriminate against "Latino prisoners with limited English language skills."

The lawsuit adds, though, that the discrimination was against the "limited English proficient" Latinos, but on the basis of "race, color, or national origin" -- not because they didn't speak English too well.

"Plaintiff cannot maintain these claims because Title VI [of the Civil Rights Act of 1964] does not prohibit disparate treatment based on language proficiency," Arpaio's lawyers from the Phoenix-based Jones, Skelton & Hochuli law firm wrote.

Those attorneys noted what the exact language of the Civil Rights Act says: "No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance."

Judge Silver batted down that claim.

"In other words, the Sheriff argues language is not a proxy for national origin," Silver writes in the ruling. "However, longstanding case law, federal regulations and agency interpretation of those regulations hold language-based discrimination constitutes a form of national origin discrimination under Title VI."

One of the other claims by Arpaio's lawyers was that there was a "failure to allege sufficient statistical evidence of discriminatory effect."

Despite the apparent fact that these statistics do exist -- for example, the DoJ says about 20 percent of MCSO immigration-sweep traffic stops violated Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizures -- Silver cites case law that says stats don't need to be alleged at this stage of a case, nor do they actually have to exist at this point.

The other attempts from Arpaio's lawyers included claims that a certain law dealing with retaliation was being wrongly applied against Arpaio, and a claim that the court couldn't even attain what it's seeking -- to "remedy discriminatory law enforcement conduct" -- citing "interference." Silver didn't buy those claims, either.

Thus, the lawsuit goes on, although the calendar shows that its still in the boring stages in the near future, like the "scheduling conference" slated for mid-January.



Sponsor Content

My Voice Nation Help
19 comments
kpegjer94
kpegjer94

when is this OGRE going to be stopped

comrade
comrade

At last the DOJ is going to crunch down the old fool; run arpayaso, run......Oh shit.... I forgot he can not

run, so crawl arpayaso crawl away.

danzigsdaddy
danzigsdaddy topcommenter

YPS, if you are still reading these posts, i have a question for you. (not being a smart ass or trying to be funny).  the judge dismissed MCSO from this case, but did not dismiss Arpaio or the county. he said the county ultimately has policy making say, not MCSO. so my question to you is thus: since A) Joe doesnt listen to or follow what the county tells him to (I.E. the spending freeze Joe ignored to buy the bus, etc etc) and B) that it seems the county wont make him adhere to their policies. where would that leave any of the responsibilities of whatever verdict is rendered? is it all on us the county? or will Joe himself also be  in the line of fire?

comrade
comrade

JAF you're deluded, you have to get your head out of the shurf's hole, the old fart and his handlers are running MCSO as a Mafialike enterprise, intimidating people, profiting from it, and bragging about it.You have to see the old fart for what  he really is, him, his family and relatives are all involved in MCSO, running it like a bussiness of their own, instead of a Law Enforcement Agency, what a mockery, as I said before, WAKE UP FOOL!!!!

comrade
comrade

There's a rumor that Arpayaso would be trying to introduce a new brand of Pink Depends

under the name of  "Toughies" (The only ones that can hold 3 loads of shit and urine)

comrade
comrade

I can not understand how this corrupt POS is still in office. Either,  he might know where the bodies are

or there might be some blackmail going on.

danzigsdaddy
danzigsdaddy topcommenter

justice may be blind, but it looks like justice being blind was Joe's lawyers entire defense

shadeaux14
shadeaux14

It's obvious that MCSO is trying to stall hoping that Joe will die in office.

And soon!

david_saint01
david_saint01 topcommenter

hmm..maybe joe will finally have to show his finances..you know, the ones he is supposed to report yearly on but either hides things or just flat omits them (IE breaking the law..after all, he charged Donahoe with the same thing)

robert_graham
robert_graham

@shadeaux14 I hope you die soon. But even if Joe died a new sheriff would take his place that is even tougher than him.

robert_graham
robert_graham

@david_saint01 What part of the word ILLEGAL (as in illegal alien) don't you want to understand? I assume you also feel that burglars and home invaders should be set free too?

danzigsdaddy
danzigsdaddy topcommenter

@david_saint01 they are saying the court couldnt attain what they are seeking? to remedy discriminitory law enforcement conduct? so they are admitting in a way that it is happening, and they either CANT or WONT do anything about it, and the court evidently cant put guidelines in effect to curtail it?

david_saint01
david_saint01 topcommenter

@JoeArpaioFan @david_saint01 what part of illegal (as in breaking the law) do you not understand dipshit? I suppose you think its ok for arpaio to skirt finance laws even though he tries to charge political rivals with doing the same? lol class is dismissed dumb ass

QstionEvythng
QstionEvythng

@JoeArpaioFan No.  We feel that the protections contained in the Constitution of the United States of America applies to everyone in government custody.  We feel that all persons are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law by an impartial jury pursuant to 6th Amendment to the Constitution.  We believe that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law pursuant to the 4th adn 14th Amendments.  We believe that the government is prohibited from imposing cruel and unusual punishment pursuant to the 8th Amendment.  That is how we feel.  G-d willing you are never wrongly accused of a crime and you never have to personally rely on these protections contained in the Constitution yourself.  But these fundamental principals as embodied in our Constitution set the U.S. apart from most other nations of the world and are, in part, what makes us unique and special as a nation.

Now Trending

Phoenix Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

Loading...