Feds sue Sherrif Joe, claim Racial profiling

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

xj0hnx

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2007
9,262
3
76
Should "Sheriff Joe" be able to do anything HE wants? Judging from the comments so far in this thread, it seems like his innocence is just assumed because he says he's fighting illegals.

I'm not sure that's how the legal system works...

Innocent until proven guilty, unless the progressives don't like you.

It would appear Joe ain't applying those protections equally.

Proof, or just spew?
 

TechAZ

Golden Member
Sep 8, 2007
1,188
0
71
On one hand many here back Joe because he is protecting the country and the constitution. But they ignore the fact that the same constitution protects all the citizens of this great country. It would appear Joe ain't applying those protections equally.

How is he not applying these protections equally?

And to those who say that anyone who supports Sheriff Joe doesn't like Mexicans.....you're just dead wrong. Are there a lot? Sure. Are most? Nope.
 

classy

Lifer
Oct 12, 1999
15,219
1
81
How is he not applying these protections equally?

And to those who say that anyone who supports Sheriff Joe doesn't like Mexicans.....you're just dead wrong. Are there a lot? Sure. Are most? Nope.

This is from the article

Arpaio believes the inquiry is focused on his immigration sweeps, patrols where deputies flood an area of a city — in some cases heavily Latino areas — to seek out traffic violators and arrest other offenders.

Critics say his deputies pull people over for minor traffic infractions because of the color of their skin so they can ask them for their proof of citizenship.

I don't know about you but that doesn't seem like he's applying equal protections to me. Now he's innocent till proven guilty. I am betting on the feds...........
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,266
126
Should "Sheriff Joe" be able to do anything HE wants? Judging from the comments so far in this thread, it seems like his innocence is just assumed because he says he's fighting illegals.

I'm not sure that's how the legal system works...

There's so much vitriol when discussing Joe, that sifting fact from fiction on internet forums especially is problematic at best.

As far as I'm concerned those who are at the highest on the government pyramid still have to abide by the rule of gathering evidence. It is my understanding (which may be subject to change since "reporting" seems to consist mainly of hyperbole) that the Feds are asking for documents without a sufficient explanation of what they are. I assume a judge will eventually step in and define this more clearly.

Joe is not permitted to do whatever he wants but even when evidence is damning our society had realized that those in power can crush those below themselves by virtue of unlimited resources and power. To combat that, we've come up with an imperfect system where there is automatic presumption of innocence in many cases. This is not always the case as in taxation issues where in essence the government has the advantage of assumed correctness and it's up to the individual to produce records showing he or she has fulfilled whatever obligations exist. Wolf or others can correct me if I am wrong or have oversimplified things.

If I am more or less correct in my understanding of things, Joe is subject to possible criminal penalties for whatever the Feds are looking for. That being the case, he has the right and the government who he immediately answers to the obligation of making sure the US govt. does not exceed it's authority under law as derived from the Constitution.

Now the statement of "well what if HE (Joe) exceeded his authority". Well if he did the Federal government can prosecute, but they have to follow the procedures. So Joe will fight, but eventually the Federal Government will win IF they can conduct themselves in a proper way and there sufficient evidence to convict. If not, then no matter how much one dislikes the man, the government hasn't demonstrated anything other than the desire to go fishing.

These rights and procedures do not exist for people one finds worthy. They exist for everyone, and if Joe has done what some believe he will be punished, but maybe not in the way or time some would like. That's the price we have for freedom. Occasionally those who should be punished go free, and sometimes the reverse. Overall, the system does work for all it's imperfections. The alternative is that public opinion drive justice. That used to be known as a lynching.

Worse than a corrupt individual is a corrupt or abusive system of great power. There is no relief from the latter.
 
Last edited:

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,902
2,359
126
This is from the article



I don't know about you but that doesn't seem like he's applying equal protections to me. Now he's innocent till proven guilty. I am betting on the feds...........

If 80% (or so) illegals in this country are hispanic, how is it racial to target areas where your sweeps would have the largest effect? I mean, why as a law enforcement officer, would you sweep, say, Scottsdale?
 

classy

Lifer
Oct 12, 1999
15,219
1
81
If 80% (or so) illegals in this country are hispanic, how is it racial to target areas where your sweeps would have the largest effect? I mean, why as a law enforcement officer, would you sweep, say, Scottsdale?

Let me address that argument because it is a common one. Arresting illegals is fine. Stopping people based on their race so you can check their legal status is illegal. Thats the problem with Joe and its the same problem with the Arizona law. No matter how bad a problem is, US citizens should not be subjected to extra scrunity because of their race. For every illegal there are hundreds if not thousands who are citizens. To violate the civil and constitutional rights of any US citizen under the guise of implementing immigration law is also illegal. Joe and his department are not immigration agents.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,902
2,359
126
Let me address that argument because it is a common one. Arresting illegals is fine. Stopping people based on their race so you can check their legal status is illegal. Thats the problem with Joe and its the same problem with the Arizona law. No matter how bad a problem is, US citizens should not be subjected to extra scrunity because of their race. For every illegal there are hundreds if not thousands who are citizens. To violate the civil and constitutional rights of any US citizen under the guise of implementing immigration law is also illegal. Joe and his department are not immigration agents.

And allow me to address your lame explaination, because its a common one.

Of the thousands of lawsuits filed against him alleging such things occur, and not one has come to fruition, at what point do you think to yourself "Self, maybe he's NOt doing these things?"

Please point to where it has been proven Joe has done this and I'll listen. Otherwise, its the same tired rhetoric heard over and over and over.
 

classy

Lifer
Oct 12, 1999
15,219
1
81
And allow me to address your lame explaination, because its a common one.

Of the thousands of lawsuits filed against him alleging such things occur, and not one has come to fruition, at what point do you think to yourself "Self, maybe he's NOt doing these things?"

Please point to where it has been proven Joe has done this and I'll listen. Otherwise, its the same tired rhetoric heard over and over and over.

Hey I am not arguing innocence or guilt. But enough complaints have been filed against him to warrant investigation by the federal government. And he has been criticized by every civil group in America from Jewish to NAACP and all those in between.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,902
2,359
126
Hey I am not arguing innocence or guilt. But enough complaints have been filed against him to warrant investigation by the federal government. And he has been criticized by every civil group in America from Jewish to NAACP and all those in between.

Looking at your posts, you, and many others, have already convicted him.
 

TechAZ

Golden Member
Sep 8, 2007
1,188
0
71
Hey I am not arguing innocence or guilt. But enough complaints have been filed against him to warrant investigation by the federal government. And he has been criticized by every civil group in America from Jewish to NAACP and all those in between.

It doesn't take much to get a large group, or several groups, of people to take arms. Look at any political rally. Look at the boycotts of Arizona. All it takes is a few people and media agencies that oppose you politically and you can make anyone look like a racist power hungry bastard. Not a day goes by without the Arizona Republic running a negative story about Arpaio...not a day. And this has been going on for years.
 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0
Innocent until proven guilty, unless the progressives don't like you.
...

Innocent until proven guilty doesn't mean you should assume malicious intent in prosecution just because you like the person being prosecuted. When the federal government pursues someone they suspect of wrongdoing, in a court of law, that IS follow innocent until proven guilty. When conservatives bitch and moan because a favorite anti-illegal immigration crusader is being prosecuted because he allegedly broke the law, that has nothing to do with "innocent until proven guilty". See the difference?
 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0
It doesn't take much to get a large group, or several groups, of people to take arms. Look at any political rally. Look at the boycotts of Arizona. All it takes is a few people and media agencies that oppose you politically and you can make anyone look like a racist power hungry bastard. Not a day goes by without the Arizona Republic running a negative story about Arpaio...not a day. And this has been going on for years.

So therefore he can't possibly ACTUALLY be a racist power hungry bastard?

I don't get the outrage over this legal proceeding...this is EXACTLY what we have a legal system for. Someone is accused of breaking the law, so they get a fair and impartial trial. They don't just get convicted by a vindictive newspaper or exonerated by fanboys. This is how things are SUPPOSED to work.
 

TechAZ

Golden Member
Sep 8, 2007
1,188
0
71
So therefore he can't possibly ACTUALLY be a racist power hungry bastard?

I don't get the outrage over this legal proceeding...this is EXACTLY what we have a legal system for. Someone is accused of breaking the law, so they get a fair and impartial trial. They don't just get convicted by a vindictive newspaper or exonerated by fanboys. This is how things are SUPPOSED to work.

No, the outrage stems from the Federal Gov't going after one of the only sheriffs who enforce the law and is unapologetic about it. The outrage is people knowing this is a smear and intimidation campaign. There have already been countless lawsuits filed against the Maricopa Sheriffs Office that have not shown any institutionalized racism, misconduct (outside of a few detention facility things...which every county has), or wrongdoing.

Do you think it is harassment if a group of people file lawsuit after lawsuit without any results? It's for the media and to sway voters.
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
70,165
28,814
136
No, the outrage stems from the Federal Gov't going after one of the only sheriffs who enforce the law and is unapologetic about it. The outrage is people knowing this is a smear and intimidation campaign. There have already been countless lawsuits filed against the Maricopa Sheriffs Office that have not shown any institutionalized racism, misconduct (outside of a few detention facility things...which every county has), or wrongdoing.

Do you think it is harassment if a group of people file lawsuit after lawsuit without any results? It's for the media and to sway voters.
Maricopa County has settled numerous cases filed against the Sheriffs' Dept with payouts in the tens of millions of dollars. If the county's attorneys thought the county could win, they wouldn't have settled again and again.
 

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,946
2,329
126
This country needs major immigration reform. The statue of liberty says "Give me your tired, your poor/Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free." In doesn't say "fuck you if you aren't American." The message of America is one of majestic greatness, not of elitist greed.

10% unemployment and you want to import even more cheap labor? You do of course realize that said cheap labor is driving down wages in a lot of employment sectors that can't be offshored (like construction). I live in Louisiana and I am currently learning to speak Spanish so that I can communicate with other trades on job sites so its not like this is just a problem in border states. Like you said, they will move to where the jobs are.

So..... your plan is to offshore what jobs we can and import cheap labor for a decent portion of the rest? That is a bad plan.

I do agree that bringing Mexico's standard of living up would go a long way towards stopping the problem but I have yet to hear a reasonable way to do that.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,902
2,359
126
Maricopa County has settled numerous cases filed against the Sheriffs' Dept with payouts in the tens of millions of dollars. If the county's attorneys thought the county could win, they wouldn't have settled again and again.

And how many of those were racial cases?

Answer: none. So whats that got to do with the current cases?
 

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,946
2,329
126
Let me address that argument because it is a common one. Arresting illegals is fine. Stopping people based on their race so you can check their legal status is illegal. Thats the problem with Joe and its the same problem with the Arizona law. No matter how bad a problem is, US citizens should not be subjected to extra scrunity because of their race. For every illegal there are hundreds if not thousands who are citizens. To violate the civil and constitutional rights of any US citizen under the guise of implementing immigration law is also illegal. Joe and his department are not immigration agents.

I wish people would get this worked up over other "checkpoints" that are, in my opinion, illegal as hell. They are even forcibly taking your blood if you exercise your 5th amendment rights. We don't have any problems with that but holy shit that Arizona law has got to fucking go!!
 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0
No, the outrage stems from the Federal Gov't going after one of the only sheriffs who enforce the law and is unapologetic about it.
...

Yes, that was exactly my point. You're not interested in whether or not this is a fair and impartial use of the legal system, you just don't want to see the Federal Government go after this guy AT ALL, because you like what he's doing. "He's a good guy" shouldn't confer immunity from prosecution...

Now it's possible that the charges against him are totally bogus...but I think it's telling that the vast majority of the people in here aren't arguing that point very strongly.
 
Last edited:

nobodyknows

Diamond Member
Sep 28, 2008
5,474
0
0
Yes, that was exactly my point. You're not interested in whether or not this is a fair and impartial use of the legal system, you just don't want to see the Federal Government go after this guy AT ALL, because you like what he's doing. "He's a good guy" shouldn't confer immunity from prosecution...

Now it's possible that the charges against him are totally bogus...but I think it's telling that the vast majority of the people in here aren't arguing that point very strongly.

After years and years.... strike that. After decades and decades of nobody enforcing our immigration laws do you thin the people upset about that are going to get too picky about it when someone is actually trying to do something about the problem.

Methinks thou doust expect much.
 

TechAZ

Golden Member
Sep 8, 2007
1,188
0
71
Yes, that was exactly my point. You're not interested in whether or not this is a fair and impartial use of the legal system, you just don't want to see the Federal Government go after this guy AT ALL, because you like what he's doing. "He's a good guy" shouldn't confer immunity from prosecution...

Now it's possible that the charges against him are totally bogus...but I think it's telling that the vast majority of the people in here aren't arguing that point very strongly.

The charges have been brought forth many times, by many lawyers, all to be shot down. Do you not think there should be a limit to how many lawsuits can be brought forth before someone says "enough is enough"?

The way I see it, and so many others, is that these lawsuits aren't just designed to find any wrongdoing....but to create an environment where there is so much pressure, and so much tax payer money going to defending Arpaio, that he is forced to resign or sway enough voters away from voting him in again. It's cheap, dirty, and an abuse of the legal system.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,589
5
0
I have deliberately resurrected this thread rather than start a new one.
This one contains relevant info if people want to look into the background of the issue in depth.

Link

PHOENIX (AP) &#8211; Dozens of Sheriff Joe Arpaio's jail officers lined up at a news conference in Phoenix Wednesday to ceremoniously hand in their federal credentials a week after they were stripped of the ability to verify the immigration status of inmates.

Arpaio spoke at the same news conference, saying he's going to hold the federal government to its promise to send 50 federal agents to do such screening in his jail. But he predicted there will be illegal immigrants in jail who won't be deported and will be put back on streets.

"I want to see how many agents are going to be coming to our jail," the sheriff said. "I want to see how long it will take for 50 agents from across the country to work in our jails."

The Department of Homeland Security announced Dec. 15 that more than 90 of Arpaio's Maricopa County jail officers could no longer check whether inmates were in the county illegally.

...

On Monday, the agency said in a letter to U.S. Sen. Jon Kyl that it would send immigration agents to screen jail inmates in Arizona's most populous county. Arpaio's aides say only one Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer has worked at the county jails since last week

So will the Feds provide the agents to handle the illegals as promised. And what will the Feds do with those that they find; ship them to their homeland; stuff them in a Federal prison or send them out onto the street.

I think the Sheriff has a better understanding of the local population that the civil rights lawyers in the Justice department sitting back inside the beltway. The lawyers are not for civil rights; they are concerned that their authority/commitment is being questioned :(
 

CrackRabbit

Lifer
Mar 30, 2001
16,642
62
91
I have deliberately resurrected this thread rather than start a new one.
This one contains relevant info if people want to look into the background of the issue in depth.

Link



So will the Feds provide the agents to handle the illegals as promised. And what will the Feds do with those that they find; ship them to their homeland; stuff them in a Federal prison or send them out onto the street.

I think the Sheriff has a better understanding of the local population that the civil rights lawyers in the Justice department sitting back inside the beltway. The lawyers are not for civil rights; they are concerned that their authority/commitment is being questioned :(

You do realize exactly WHY the feds stripped the MCSO of their ability to screen inmates right?
This little thing Sheriff Joe did is just a dog and pony show for the media to show that the big bad feds are picking on him.