Trump-era DOJ reversed prior support for the federal monitorship
In his Sept. 10 ruling, Snow wrote that the record does not support a finding that the department would continue its reforms absent federal monitoring. “The record does not support a finding that, absent federal monitoring, Defendants are unlikely to resume the conduct that necessitated the Court’s injunctive Orders,” the judge stated in a 72-page opinion. “Those disparities remain,” he added, referring to data showing Latino drivers continue to be stopped, searched and arrested at higher rates than white drivers in Arizona’s most populous county.
The disparities Snow cited draw on an analysis prepared for the plaintiffs by a University of California, Berkeley professor of computer science, who reviewed traffic reports collected by the sheriff’s office. The analysis approximates that Hispanic motorists in Maricopa County are 40% more likely to be arrested than white motorists, stopped 30% longer, and 2.5 times more likely to be searched. “The responsibility is on the defendants to explain the stark disparities for Latino drivers,” Snow wrote. “They have failed to do so.” To end court oversight, the sheriff’s office must be in full compliance with the reforms continuously for three years.
The opinion singles out Sheridan, who serves as the current sheriff and was the agency’s second-in-command during much of the period covered by the lawsuit. “Then Chief Deputy, now Sheriff, Sheridan in particular was found to have abused his authority over MCSO’s internal affairs process by obstructing and manipulating misconduct investigations and disciplinary proceedings — including those involving himself — to shield deputies and Command Staff from accountability and undermine the enforcement of remedies designed to address the constitutional violations against the Plaintiff class,” the judge wrote in an opinion that mentions Sheridan 30 times. The department declined to comment on Snow’s statements about Sheridan. Sheridan previously told Arizona Luminaria and ProPublica that he disagreed with Snow’s assessment. “I was very truthful. To this day, I think he got that wrong about me,” Sheridan said.
Sheridan, a Republican, was found in civil contempt in 2016 for denying knowledge of Snow’s court order to stop making illegal immigration arrests. Sheridan has said he was always truthful. He inherited the settlement when he took office in January 2025.
The yearslong federal monitorship of Arizona’s largest sheriff’s office dates back to a 2007 class action racial profiling lawsuit, originally filed as Melendres v. Arpaio, which found the department under Arpaio had violated the constitutional rights of Latinos in the state. The lawsuit is named for Manuel de Jesus Melendres Ortega, a legal resident who was arrested in one of Arpaio’s traffic sweeps. Today, an estimated 1.5 million Latino or Hispanic people live in Maricopa County, according to U.S. Census Bureau data cited in the ruling. In 2013, Snow ordered the department to document all traffic stops to detect patterns of racial bias and to employ additional investigators to probe reports of deputy misconduct. He also appointed a monitor to oversee compliance.
An investigation by Arizona Luminaria and ProPublica found that despite the monitor’s annual reviews showing ongoing racial disparities in traffic stops, Sheridan and county leaders continued to press for an end to court oversight.
Despite the passage of more than a decade, Snow wrote, the department “has yet to convince the judge that its deputies don’t racially profile Latino drivers and that it adequately investigates deputies’ alleged misconduct.” A 2025 evaluation by the court-appointed monitor found the department complied with more than 90% of the requirements but fell short in the two areas that most directly affect Latino drivers: eliminating racial bias in traffic stops and promptly investigating allegations of deputy misconduct.
The motion to end oversight was filed by Maricopa County in December, with the sheriff’s office later joining. County leaders have repeatedly cited costs as they have called for an end to court monitoring. In the county’s original motion, attorneys wrote that “MCSO has reformed its policies, improved its workforce, and implemented mechanisms to assure that racial profiling never occurs. This litigation has been a success, and the time has come to allow MCSO to stand on its own two feet, freed of oversight.”
Maricopa County Board of Supervisors Chair Kate Brophy McGee and Vice Chair Debbie Lesko, both Republicans, said they were disappointed by the ruling. In a joint statement, they wrote that “the court has maintained an unelected and unaccountable federal monitor over MCSO – creating bureaucracy and regulatory burdens that have cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars. That ‘oversight’ comes at the cost of public safety, as the county must pay the monitor and his staff by foregoing other critical services.” Steve Gallardo, the county’s lone Democrat on the five-member board, opposed ending oversight, advocating for continued progress toward eliminating racial bias in policing.
Following complaints from Sheridan and Republican county supervisors that oversight costs exceeded $200 million, the court ordered an audit of the sheriff’s office spending. Court findings shared in 2025 showed that nearly 72% of the sheriff’s office spending submitted for reimbursement was misattributed or misappropriated, with only $63 million appropriately charged to the settlement.
Sheriff’s office officials welcomed parts of the ruling. “We believe MCSO has implemented durable remedies for violations that occurred 19 years and three administrations ago,” Sgt. Joaquin Enriquez said. “We are encouraged that the Court has provided a framework on eliminating portions of the Order that are no longer necessary and focusing compliance efforts on the remaining issues to be addressed.” Speaking to KTAR News, a Phoenix-area radio station, Sheridan said he saw positive elements of the judge’s order but questioned whether his office could ever satisfy all parties to the lawsuit. “We at the sheriff’s office feel we’re in compliance with all the court’s orders,” Sheridan told KTAR News. “But the court-appointed monitor does not believe so. It’s a matter of us making a pitch to the court directly, not through the monitor.”
The Department of Justice joined the Melendres case and settlement in 2015 and had supported Snow’s oversight and the reforms during the Obama and Biden administrations. But with President Donald Trump back in the White House, an attorney with the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division informed the court in January that the department supported ending oversight. The shift places the federal government at odds with the court it had previously backed.
Raul Piña, a member of a court-mandated community advisory board tasked with helping the sheriff’s office rebuild trust with Latinos, told Arizona Luminaria and ProPublica that the problems at the department extended beyond one leader, to multiple systems that have allowed biased policing over the long term. To change that, Piña said, requires a broader overhaul. “You can paint the house, but if the foundation is broken you will have the same problem,” he said.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona, which originally filed the lawsuit on behalf of citizens and legal residents caught in Arpaio’s sweeps, celebrated the ruling. Christine Wee, senior staff attorney for the ACLU of Arizona, said in a statement that “any other decision would have had a devastating impact on Maricopa County’s Latino residents.” She added that “the Court’s decision recognizes that any current and future misconduct committed by MCSO will not be tolerated. Simply put, MCSO is not ready for the court-ordered reforms to end.”
Reporting on the case noted that under Arpaio, Maricopa County became an early testing ground for Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s 287(g) program, which lets local police enforce federal immigration laws. Many Arizonans say abuses from that time, including profiling of Latino motorists, foreshadowed what is playing out now under the Trump administration’s expanded use of 287(g) and its mass deportation system. The arrests of hundreds of American citizens by immigration authorities since Trump returned to the White House have prompted widespread accusations of racial profiling; in response, the Department of Homeland Security told ProPublica that agents do not racially profile or target Americans. “We don’t arrest US citizens for immigration enforcement,” wrote spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin. The decade-plus of legal oversight of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Department, criminal justice experts told the news organizations, offers insight into the difficulties of reforming law enforcement agencies charged with endemic racial bias.
Snow’s ruling does permit the trimming of certain monitoring requirements, acknowledging the “burdens” that come with court oversight. But the central finding — that constitutional violations persist and that the department has not earned the right to operate without court supervision — leaves the monitorship intact for now.