United States Ninth Circuit

In an civil rights action against Sheriff Joseph Arpaio and the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office, alleging that defendants have a custom, policy and practice of racially profiling Latino drivers and passengers, and of stopping them pretextually under the auspices of enforcing federal and state immigration-related laws, the district court's judgment is affirmed in part and vacated in part where: 1) the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office improperly was named as a party in the action; 2) the court did not clearly err in finding that a) defendant's unconstitutional policies extended beyond the saturation patrol context, and b) the named plaintiffs had standing to assert the claims of absent class members who were stopped during non-saturation patrols; 3) the injunction was not overbroad simply because it included non-saturation patrols; and 4) the provisions of the injunction which broadly require the appointed Monitor to consider the internal investigations and reports of officer misconduct created a problem to the extent that such investigations and reports were unrelated to the constitutional violations found by the district court.

Appellate Information

• Decided 04/15/2015
• Published 04/15/2015

Judges

• Wallace

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel