Sheriff Joe Arpaio in contempt of federal court over racial profiling
EndFragment
The distinction could mean the difference between civil contempt and criminal contempt — or “fix it” remedies compared with outright punishment.
The judge set a May 31 date for a hearing for attorneys to discuss penalties. Shortly thereafter, Snow said, he would issue an order on sanctions and whether he would refer the case for a criminal contempt trial.
The contempt proceedings were based on three violations that occurred throughout the history of the underlying racial-profiling case: that the Sheriff's Office failed to turn over video evidence that was required before the trial; that officials continued to enforce immigration law after Snow barred the practice; and that Sheridan failed to quietly collect evidence after the trial, as Snow had ordered him to do.
Attorneys from the American Civil Liberties Union and Covington & Burling represented plaintiffs both in the initial racial-profiling case and contempt hearings.
Arpaio’s “state of mind” served as the primary topic for debate throughout the contempt proceedings, as the evidence left little doubt that his agency failed each order.
EndFragment