Arpaio Busted For Crime Sweeps

I am a little late to this, via the Washington Post

A federal judge ruled on Friday that Sheriff Joe Arpaio and his deputies had violated the constitutional rights of Latinos by targeting them during raids and traffic stops here and throughout Maricopa County...

The ruling prohibits the sheriff’s office from using “race or Latino ancestry” as a factor in deciding to stop any vehicle with Latino occupants, or as a factor in deciding whether they may be in the country without authorization.

It also prohibits deputies from reporting a vehicle’s Latino occupants to federal immigration authorities or detaining, holding or arresting them, unless there is more than just a “reasonable belief” that they are in the country illegally. To detain them, the ruling said, the deputies must also have reasonable suspicion that the occupants are violating the state’s human-trafficking and employment laws or committing other crimes.

Good.  Phoenix residents, even those who support Arpaio, all know people are routinely busted here for "driving while brown."    I remember one time Arpaio made one of his famous "crime sweeps" through the tony suburb of Fountain Hills (where he lives) and managed to arrest dozens of Hispanics -- more Hispanics than I thought one could even find in that neighborhood, much less find committing crimes.  Seriously, I don't think I could have found that many on a bet.

This was one of his more execrable raids

Deputies from the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office raided a Mesa landscaping company early Wednesday morning, arresting nearly three dozen people suspected of being in the country illegally.

The raid on offices of Artistic Land Management, on Main Street just west of Dobson Road, happened about 4:30 a.m., according to one workerwho was handcuffed and detained before being released when he produced documentation that he was in the country legally....

Juarez estimated about 35 workers were handcuffed with plastic zip-ties while deputies checked for documents. Those who could provide proof they were in the country legally were released, while others were put on buses and taken away.

Basically his deputies zip tied everyone with brown skin, releasing them only when they could produce their papers.  It has become a common occurrence in the Hispanic community here to have family members racing to work with identity documents to free loved ones from Arpaio captivity.

Here is just a partial roundup of links on Arpaio here.


  1. LarryGross:

    what happened to the business owners who were hiring illegals?

  2. a_random_guy:

    Nothing is black-and-white. There is no doubt that Sheriff Joe has gone overboard. He should have probable cause, and in most cases a warrant, before detaining anyone.

    However, there is absolutely nothing wrong with profiling. Indeed, *not* profiling is a waste of time and resources. Consider looking for terrorists: while one should have one's eyes open for anything, the danger is considerably more likely to stem from young middle-eastern males than from asian grandmothers.

    So: you are in Arizona and you want to check for illegal immigrants: it is a simple fact that most illegal immigrants in Arizona will be hispanic. Hence, that's where you should spend most of your effort. This is not rocket science; anything else is PC stupidity.

  3. Sam L.:

    Why are those with documents not smart/wise enough to carry them?

  4. Chris Kahrhoff:

    What papers do you carry with you constantly to prove your citizenship?

    Shouldn't someone be suspected of committing a crime before being placed in flex-cuffs?

  5. Chris Kahrhoff:

    What documents do you carry with you to prove your citizenship?

  6. LarryGross:

    If "joe" had been as rough on businesses that hired illegals.. I might agree. But he was selective and went after the vulnerable and ignored those that were taking advantage of the illegals.

    If he had going after both - equally - then he might have been a good guy. but by going after only one, he was not an admirable guy IMHO of course.

    Most of the illegal problem could be fairly easily solved if we did what Canada does and that is we rip the businesses who hire illegal a new butt ... and the problem goes away.

  7. jimc5499:

    I have been detained twice, in the last few years, until I could show identification. Both times I was riding a 10 speed coming home from the pool. It turned out that I fit the description of someone the police were looking for. I phoned home and had someone bring my wallet to the Police station. Both times I was handcuffed. I really didn't have a problem with this, especially when they showed me the picture of who they were after. I believe the term is doppelganger, he looked that much like me.

  8. Chris Kahrhoff:

    I'm not in the habit of answering any questions ever.

  9. MingoV:

    The court order isn't worth the paper it's written on. There is no monitoring or enforcement mechanism. The "reasonable belief" clause is equivalent to the "the drug dog twitched" excuse for an illegal search. Arpaio and his deputies will document carefully their "legitimate" reasons for stopping and detaining Hispanics.

  10. LarryGross:

    I'm of the view that the Feds are drawing a giant target on Arpaio and daring him to continue.

  11. mesocyclone:

    Absolutely right. Because Coyote is in favor of unrestricted immigration is not a good reason for him to support the left-wing PC crap about not profiling. I fear his extreme Libertarian views on immigration, combined with his long stated (and more justified) dislike for Sheriff Joe have blinded him in this case.

    Hell yes, profile.

  12. mahtso:

    A: a drivers license

  13. Chris Kahrhoff:

    I'm not in the habit of showing mine unless I'm driving. But then I'm not an authoritarian statist boot licker.

  14. herdgadfly:

    A more honest assessment would have considered that the Feds were out to stop investigations of illegals residing in AZ. It seems to me that the rights of non-citizens are supplanting the legal residents of the state. Nationally, blacks are violating the laws at a higher rate than whites, so more are being incarcerated than is statistically satisfactory to blacks. The higher number of hispanic illegals in AZ, causes the same statistical anomaly. What is so tough about carrying IDs that permit you to engage in daily commerce within the state. You cannot walk into a courthouse without ID, so how can a judge think that it is improper for local LEOs to ask for proper ID - no matter what your race or skin color is?

  15. mahtso:

    I'm not in the habit of showing my drivers license, whether I am driving or not. However, if a police officer with proper authority requested that I show mine, I would do so. Similarly, if a police officer had reason to suspect that I was not in the county legally and with proper authority she requested evidence to the contrary, I would provide the DL.

  16. Chris Kahrhoff:

    Well that makes you a bootlicker. I have been asked by police for my ID and have told them I am not required by law to provide it and I would not do so and haven't. But then what the fuck do I know I'm just an individual rights absolutist.

  17. mahtso:

    I usually ignore comments that are so childish, but I'll make an exception assuming that I was not clear: I wrote "with proper authority" -- so if you were not required to show an ID there was no proper authority. And if complying with proper authority makes me a bootlicker, I can live with that more easily than in anarchy, which is the alternative.

  18. Chris Kahrhoff:

    I usually ignore bootlickers but apparently I wasn't clear. Your drivers license is only required when actually, you know, driving. Short of that brownshirts can snort my taint.