University of Michigan Law School
The Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name United States v. Maricopa County PN-AZ-0001
Docket / Court 2:12-cv-00981-LOA ( D. Ariz. )
State/Territory Arizona
Case Type(s) Policing
Case Summary
On May 10, 2012, the US Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division (“DOJ), Special Litigation Section, filed this lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 14141 (Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994) and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The DOJ filed the suit in the United States Court ... read more >
On May 10, 2012, the US Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division (“DOJ), Special Litigation Section, filed this lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 14141 (Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994) and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The DOJ filed the suit in the United States Court for the District of Arizona, Phoenix Division. The defendant is Maricopa County and the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Department. The United States is requesting injunctive and declaratory relief that Maricopa County engages in a pattern or practice that unconstitutionally discriminates against Latinos. Specifically, the United States is alleging that Maricopa’s police practices single out Latinos and fail to provide constitutionally required services for Latinos under Maricopa County’s control.

In September of 2010, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against Maricopa County under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for the Sheriff’s Office’s failure to comply with an DOJ investigation into the targeting and unconstitutional treatment of Latinos (PN-AZ-2) (Docket #: 2:10-cv-01878). Maricopa County settled the lawsuit in June of 2011, and agreed to cooperate with the DOJ investigation.

On December 15, 2011, a findings letter reporting the result of the investigation was issued by the DOJ. The letter found that the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO) was engaged in an unconstitutional pattern of policing. The DOJ alleged that MSCO profiles Latinos, and unlawfully stops, detains, and arrests Latinos. The DOJ also found that services in the Maricopa County Jail for people of limited English proficiency are sub-par or nonexistent. The DOJ found that these problems are underscored by the lack of policy or procedure to ensure constitutional policing. This lawsuit followed.

This case is ongoing. As of this writing (5/15/12), the Defendants have yet to file an answer.

Blase Kearney - 05/14/2012


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Constitutional Clause
Unconstitutional search and seizure
Discrimination-basis
Race discrimination
General
Failure to discipline
Failure to supervise
Failure to train
False arrest
Inadequate citizen complaint investigations and procedures
Racial profiling
Unconstitutional conditions of confinement
Plaintiff Type
U.S. Dept of Justice plaintiff
Causes of Action Title VI, Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq.
42 U.S.C. § 14141
Defendant(s) Maricopa County
Plaintiff Description The United States Department of Justice
Indexed Lawyer Organizations U.S. Dept. of Justice Civil Rights Division
Class action status sought No
Class action status granted No
Prevailing Party not on record
Public Int. Lawyer No
Nature of Relief None yet
Source of Relief None yet
Form of Settlement
Order Duration not on record
Case Closing Year n/a
Case Ongoing Yes
Case Listing PN-AZ-0002 : United States v. Maricopa County (D. Ariz.)
Additional Resources
click to show/hide detail
Case Studies Panopticism for Police: Structural Reform Bargaining and Police Regulation by Data-Driven Surveillance
By: Mary D. Fan (University of Washington)
Citation: Forthcoming, 87 Washington L. Rev. __ (2012).
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

Docket(s)
2:12-cv-00981-LOA (D. Ariz.) 05/01/2013
PN-AZ-0001-9000 PDF | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
United States' Investigation of the Maricopa County Sheriffs Office 12/15/2011
PN-AZ-0001-0004 PDF | Detail
Complaint 05/10/2012
PN-AZ-0001-0001 PDF | Detail
Document Source: Bloomberg Law
Judges Anderson, Lawrence O. (D. Ariz.) [Magistrate]
PN-AZ-0001-9000
Silver, Roslyn O. (D. Ariz.)
PN-AZ-0001-9000
Monitors/Masters None on record
Plaintiff's Lawyers Austin, Roy L. (District of Columbia)
PN-AZ-0001-9000
Caspar, Edward G. (District of Columbia)
PN-AZ-0001-0001 | PN-AZ-0001-9000
Gayle, Winsome (District of Columbia)
PN-AZ-0001-0001 | PN-AZ-0001-9000
Mondino, Jennifer L. (District of Columbia)
PN-AZ-0001-0001 | PN-AZ-0001-9000
Perez, Sergio (District of Columbia)
PN-AZ-0001-0001 | PN-AZ-0001-9000
Perez, Thomas E. (District of Columbia)
PN-AZ-0001-0004 | PN-AZ-0001-9000
Smith, Jonathan Mark (District of Columbia)
PN-AZ-0001-9000
Defendant's Lawyers Connolly, Joel E. (Illinois)
PN-AZ-0001-9000
Dysart, Robert L (Arizona)
PN-AZ-0001-9000
Jones, William R. Jr. (Arizona)
PN-AZ-0001-9000
Masterson, John T. (Arizona)
PN-AZ-0001-9000
Popolizio, Joseph John (Arizona)
PN-AZ-0001-9000
Voepel, Lori Lea (Arizona)
PN-AZ-0001-9000
Walker, Richard K (Arizona)
PN-AZ-0001-9000
Webb, Dan K. (Illinois)
PN-AZ-0001-9000
Other Lawyers None on record

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -
The Clearinghouse has been generously supported by the National Science Foundation.