(The Center Square) - The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors is continuing its fight to end a longtime, costly federal oversight of the sheriff's department. One member, in fact, says he's willing to go all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court to appeal it.
In September, U.S. District Judge G. Murray Snow rejected the Arizona's most populous county's request to end the federal oversight that has been going on at the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office since 2013.
The Board of Supervisors filed a Rule 60(b) motion in December, asking the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona to vacate the federal court’s injunctions overseeing the sheriff’s office. If Snow won't reconsider his decision, the next step is to file an appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit in San Francisco, Supervisor Mark Stewart told The Center Square.
There haven't been major judicial developments since the Rule 60(b) motion was filed. In the meantime, Maricopa County supervisors, whose board is based in Phoenix, continue to speak out against the oversight, which they say has added significantly to the county's tax burden.
Supervisor Thomas Galvin told The Center Square that Maricopa County taxpayers “have not been served by this lengthy oversight," which has cost them more than $350 million since 2013.
Stewart noted the federal oversight costs the county between $20 million and $30 million a year, adding that the county has more than “90 officers working in internal affairs” to manage the case. He noted they also handle other matters.
He estimated these officers make $150,000 annually.
Galvin said on Wednesday that he is “not going to give up” in the legal fight, noting an appeal is worth pursuing.
Stewart also said he supports Maricopa County's appeal, noting it has “the grounds to be able to appeal.”
Galvin said he is prepared to take the case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. “Ending the federal oversight is the most important issue for [the county] in the last 10 years."
The federal oversight stemmed from the Manuel de Jesus Ortega Melendres v. Arpaio class action lawsuit in 2007.
The Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office came under federal oversight after being found in the lawsuit to have racially profiled and made illegal traffic stops against Latinos, violating their constitutional rights.
Snow, who has presided over the case since the federal oversight started, said in his ruling that the county has “failed to demonstrate that the objectives of the court’s orders have been achieved.”
“Nor have they established a durable remedy sufficient to ensure that, absent the court’s orders, they will not resume the violations that led to the issuance of those orders,” he added.
Dave Moyer, a spokesperson for the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office, said the department was “disappointed by the court’s decision.”
“We believe MCSO has implemented durable remedies for violations that occurred 19 years and three administrations ago,” he said in a statement emailed to The Center Square.
However, Moyer explained the sheriff’s office is “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.”
“This will allow MCSO to focus its resources on achieving full and effective compliance with the remaining requirements. MCSO looks forward to working with the parties on this process,” he added.
According to Stewart, continuing to spend taxpayer money on the federal oversight “doesn’t make the community any safer.”
Maricopa County could spend all that money instead on better equipment for law enforcement, hiring more detectives and prosecutors, and better salaries for law enforcement, Stewart told The Center Square.
U.S. Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Gilbert, said he has a “major problem” with the continual oversight of the sheriff’s office.
Biggs, who's running for governor against Democratic incumbent Katie Hobbs, said he would like to see Judge Snow recuse himself from the case and allow another judge to determine if the oversight is still needed.
Biggs noted the U.S. House passed his Monitor Accountability Act with bipartisan support. The bill would create new rules for federal court-appointed monitors, such as five-year term limits, case transfers to another judge after six years and fee restrictions.
The bill is currently sitting in the Senate.
Robert Warshaw has been Maricopa County’s court-appointed monitor since 2014. Galvin said the county spends more than $2 million annually on Warshaw.
According to Biggs, it is “absolutely ridiculous” that this federal oversight has gone on for so long and that the county has spent so much money on it over the years.
Biggs said not many remedies exist in the case and “the power that these judges are taking and giving to monitors is enormous.”
The Center Square reached out to Hobbs, but her office did not respond before publication.
