University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name Melendres v. Arpaio PN-AZ-0003
Docket / Court 2:07-cv-02513-GMS ( D. Ariz. )
State/Territory Arizona
Case Type(s) Immigration and/or the Border
Policing
Attorney Organization ACLU Chapters (any)
ACLU National (all projects)
MALDEF
U.S. Dept. of Justice Civil Rights Division
Case Summary
On December 12, 2007, a group of plaintiffs filed this lawsuit in United States District Court for the District of Arizona against the County of Maricopa and the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office, as well as Sheriff Joe Arpaio. The plaintiffs sought to represent a class of Latino persons who have ... read more >
On December 12, 2007, a group of plaintiffs filed this lawsuit in United States District Court for the District of Arizona against the County of Maricopa and the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office, as well as Sheriff Joe Arpaio. The plaintiffs sought to represent a class of Latino persons who have been or will be stopped, detained, interrogated, or searched by the Sheriff or his agents in moving or parked vehicles in Maricopa County. They alleged claims under the Fourth Amendment (search and seizure) and Fourteenth Amendment (equal protection) to the U.S. Constitution; Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; and the Arizona state constitution. The plaintiffs were represented by private pro bono attorneys, the American Civil Liberties Union (both local and national), and the Mexican American Legal Defense Fund. The United States Department of Justice (Civil Rights Division and local U.S. Attorneys) appeared in the case as amicus, explaining that had a sharp interest in the matter because of its separate civil rights lawsuit against the County, United States v. Maricopa County, PN-AZ-0001 in this Clearinghouse. The plaintiffs asked the court for declaratory and injunctive relief against the defendants, claiming that defendants have engaged in a widespread pattern and practice of racial profiling and racially or ethnically discriminatory treatment in "enforcing" federal immigration laws against Latino persons without regard for actual citizenship or immigration status.

The plaintiffs alleged that defendants have launched a series of "crime suppression sweeps" to target Latino persons for investigation of immigration status, using pretextual and unfounded stops, racially motivated questioning, searches, and/or baseless arrests. These sweeps include a volunteer "posse" that help to carry out defendants' policies and practices. Defendants had claimed authority under a limited agreement with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). However, plaintiffs allege that the ICE agreement prohibits these practices, because the agreement only allows for questioning of immigration status once someone is suspected of violating a state law or federal law more severe than a traffic offense. plaintiffs further allege that defendants' pattern and practice of racial profiling goes beyond these "sweeps" to include widespread, everyday targeting and mistreatment of drivers and passengers in Maricopa County who appear to be Latino. plaintiffs allege Latino drivers and passengers are stopped at higher rates, treated more intrusively, and detained longer than similarly situated Caucasian drivers and passengers (even within the same vehicle). plaintiffs also allege that defendants have set up a "hotline" for "tips" on illegal immigrants, which they allege invites individuals to equate race with immigration status. plaintiffs allege a failure to train personnel and volunteers adequately and to promulgate appropriate policies to prevent infringement of plaintiffs' rights. Allegedly, the Sheriff made many public statements about his intent to "go after illegals" and said publicly that physical appearance was basis to question someone about their immigration status.

On July 15, 2009, the court (Judge Mary H. Murgia) granted the defendants' motion for recusal. The defendants claimed that only the day after Judge Murgia ruled against them did they become aware that Judge Murgia's (identical twin) sister was the President and CEO of the National Council of La Raza (NCLR); they argued that accordingly, Judge Murgia must recuse herself. The court found that the motion was untimely, that the defendants had not shown any evidence of the court's bias, and that her sister's position was not enough to compel recusal. However, the court found that NCLR's "Stop the Hate" online campaign, which contains articles that are highly disparaging of these defendants and which takes a strong stand on disputed legal and factual matters in this case (and which contain pictures of the court's identical twin sister) might lead the public to question Judge Murgia's impartiality, and that she should recuse herself in this close call. Melendres v. Arpaio, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65069, 2009 WL 2132693 (D. Ariz. July 15, 2009). The case was reassigned to Judge G. Murray Snow.

On August 13, 2009, Judge Snow denied the County's motion to stay proceedings pending DOJ investigations. Melendres v. Maricopa County, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 75364, 2009 WL 2515618 (D. Ariz. Aug. 13, 2009). On October 13, 2009, the court approved a joint motion and stipulation of plaintiffs and defendant Maricopa County to dismiss Maricopa County without prejudice.

On December 23, 2011, the court issued an order denying summary judgment and sending the case to trial in large part. Based on the few statistic sheets that were available, the court held that the finder of fact may draw the following inferences from the statistic sheets that MCSO shredded: that they would have suggested officers involved in special operations did not follow a "zero tolerance" policy requiring them to stop all traffic offenders; that they would have included a significantly higher number of arrests in the categories "Illegal Alien turned over to ICE/LEAR" and/or "Suspected Illegal Alien arrested on state charges" than records documenting ordinary patrol activity. Based on the recovered emails, the court found that the finder of fact could draw the following inferences from emails that MCSO irretrievably purged: that MCSO maintained a file of citizen complaints making requests for special operations; that MCSO conducted operations in areas named in the complaints; and that at least some of the citizen communications complained about "Mexicans," "day laborers," or "illegal immigrants" but did not provide a description of any criminal activity. Melendres v. Arpaio, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 148187 (D. Ariz. Dec. 23, 2011).

On the same day, December 23, 2011, the court certified the class of "all Latino persons who, since January 2007, have been or will be in the future, stopped, detained, questioned, or searched by MCSO agents while driving or sitting in a vehicle on a public roadway or parking area in Maricopa County, Arizona." The court also enjoined MCSO and its officers from detaining any person only because they believe or know that the person is unlawfully present in the United States. Ortega-Melendres v. Arpaio, 836 F. Supp. 2d 959 (D. Ariz. 2011). The Maricopa County Sheriff's Office filed an interlocutory appeal with the Ninth Circuit. Later, on September 25, 2012, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the District court's order. De Jesus Ortega Melendres v. Arpaio, 695 F.3d 990 (9th Cir. Ariz. 2012).

In the meantime, the matter proceeded to a bench trial, held in July and August 2012. On May 24, 2013, Judge Snow issued a 142-page decision finding for the plaintiffs. The court found the plaintiffs entitled to injunctive relief to remedy the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment violations caused by the Sheriff's Office past and continuing operations, and entered a permanent injunction forbidding the MCSO from:
  • detaining, holding or arresting Latino occupants of vehicles in Maricopa County based on a reasonable belief, without more, that such persons are in the country without authorization;
  • following or enforcing its LEAR policy against any Latino occupant of a vehicle in Maricopa County;
  • using race or Latino ancestry as a factor in determining to stop any vehicle in Maricopa County with a Latino occupant;
  • using race or Latino ancestry as a factor in making law enforcement decisions with respect to whether any Latino occupant of a vehicle in Maricopa County may be in the country without authorization;
  • detaining Latino occupants of vehicles stopped for traffic violations for a period longer than reasonably necessary to resolve the traffic violation in the absence of reasonable suspicion that any of them have committed or are committing a violation of federal or state criminal law;
  • detaining, holding or arresting Latino occupants of a vehicle in Maricopa County for violations of the Arizona Human Smuggling Act without a reasonable basis for believing that, under all the circumstances, the necessary elements of the crime are present; and
  • detaining, arresting or holding persons based on a reasonable suspicion that they are conspiring with their employer to violate the Arizona Employer Sanctions Act.
  • The defendant appealed this decision, along with the denial of their initial motion to dismiss (Docket No. 13-16285).

    The parties negotiated a consent decree to ensure the Maricopa Sheriff's Office complied with the court's findings of facts for the plaintiffs. On October 2, 2013, after hearing the terms on which the parties could and could not agree, the court (Judge Snow) issued an order making the previous injunctions permanent and establishing the methods for compliance. The order required the Sheriff's Office to create a unit to aid in compliance and a system for identifying problematic behavior and provided for an independent monitor to ensure compliance. It further demanded that all of the Sheriff's policies and procedures conform to the US and AZ constitutions and laws, that the monitor review any of the Sheriff's immigration-related policies and practices, that all officers receive training on nondiscriminatory policing, that the Sheriffs create an accountable system for documenting traffic stops including dash-cam recording, that all complaints are brought forward and addressed, and that the Sheriffs get involved in the community to rebuild public trust.

    The Sheriffs appealed this order as well (Docket No. 13-17238), and it was consolidated with their previous appeal.

    On April 4, and October 10, 2014, the court issued orders amending the permanent injunction, giving the Monitor, rather than the Sheriff's Office, the community outreach responsibility to serve as a liaison between the public and the Sheriff's Office. The second of the orders amended the injunction to allow for body-mounted cameras as opposed to dash mounted cameras, for the purpose of recording traffic stops.

    On September 11, 2014, the court (Judge Snow) awarded attorneys' fees to the plaintiffs, as the prevailing party in a civil rights case. The court retained jurisdiction of this action for all purposes until such time as the defendants have achieved full and effective Compliance and maintained such compliance for no less than three years.

    On February 12, 2015, Judge Snow entered an order for an evidentiary hearing to address whether MCSO committed contempt of the court. This order was in response to a 2013 video released of Sherriff Arpaio telling his officers to disregard the court's order requiring them to track the race and ethnicity of the individuals they stopped. Further videos were retrieved showing officers had detained people against the court's earlier orders and that these officers had been unlawfully taking detainees possessions.

    On April 15, 2015, Justice John Wallace for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded Judge Snow's May 24, 2013 permanent injunction. He held that the the named plaintiffs were adequate class representatives and the district court had not abused its discretion. He found the requirement within the permanent injunction that monitors consider "disciplinary outcomes for any violation of department policy" and assess whether deputies should be subject to "civil suites or criminal charges for off-duty conduct" was overbroad. 784 F.3d 1254

    The United States moved to intervene based on the "general public importance" of the matter. Judge Snow granted the motion on August 13, 2015. The United States's intervenor complaint cited violations of 42 USC § 14141(b) and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It sought equitable and injunctive relief.

    On August 26, 2015, Judge Snow issued an order amending the supplemental permanent injunction. In response to the defendants' appeal of the initial supplemental permanent injunction, the Ninth Circuit affirmed all provisions except for those allowing the Monitor to consider MCSO's discipline for "any violations of department policy" and whether any deputies were repeatedly party to any "complaints, civil suits, or criminal charges, including for off-duty conduct." After the Ninth Circuit's ruling, Judge Snow narrowed the Monitor's considerations to only include violations pursuant to this particular case and injunction.

    Meanwhile, in a related case filed by the Department of Justice in 2012, Judge Silver for the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona, settled certain issues but required the DOJ to pursue further relief within this case. (PN-AZ-0001 in this Clearinghouse).

    The parties then litigated evidentiary issues for several months. On May 13, 2016, Judge Snow issued a Finding of Fact holding defendants in civil contempt of the court and setting a hearing date for May 31, 2016. 2016 WL 2783715. Based on the Finding of Fact, the court found that the defendants' had failed to implement the court's preliminary injunction, failed to disclose thousands of relevant discovery items, and deliberately violated court orders. These actions harmed the plaintiff class, impeded litigation, and led to a trial that did not adequately address plaintiffs' constitutional rights. Judge Snow therefore issued an amended supplemental permanent injunction on July 22, 2016. The Injunction required MCSO to investigate all allegations of employee misconduct related to the issues in this case; implement misconduct related training, develop a civilian complaint intake, implement transparency measures, and ensure document preservation and production. It further demanded that all policies, procedures, protocols, training materials, and other relevant materials remain subject to review and comment by the compliance Monitor implemented in the first supplemental permanent injunction. 2016 WL 3965949

    On August 19, 2016, Judge Snow issued an order referring Sheriff Arpaio to a randomly selected judge for criminal proceedings to determine whether he should be held in criminal contempt for:
  • Violation of the court's December 23, 2011, preliminary injunction;
  • failure to disclose all relevant materials for the investigation; and
  • his intentional failure to preserve and produce required records as directed in the court's April 23, 2015, order.
  • The criminal proceedings continued separately to this case.

    In November 2016, Paul Penzone defeated Joe Arpaio in the Arizona election for Sheriff. On January 13, 2017, the court replaced Penzone as the named defendant for the case.

    The parties continued litigating over legal fees. Although they went to mediation, this was unsuccessful. On March 3, 2017, the Ninth Circuit ordered Maricopa County to pay $400,395.55 to the plaintiffs to cover legal fees.

    The Monitor continues to oversee the MCSO's compliance with the multiple supplemental injunctive relief orders entered. The case is ongoing.

    Emily Goldman - 03/02/2013
    Benjamin St. Pierre - 11/20/2014
    Gabriela Hybel - 04/13/2017


    compress summary

    - click to show/hide ALL -
    Issues and Causes of Action
    click to show/hide detail
    Issues
    Constitutional Clause
    Equal Protection
    Unreasonable search and seizure
    Content of Injunction
    Develop anti-discrimination policy
    Discrimination Prohibition
    Implement complaint/dispute resolution process
    Monitor/Master
    Monitoring
    Preliminary relief denied
    Provide antidiscrimination training
    Recordkeeping
    Reporting
    Defendant-type
    Jurisdiction-wide
    Law-enforcement
    Discrimination-basis
    National origin discrimination
    General
    Aggressive behavior
    Disparate Impact
    Disparate Treatment
    Excessive force
    Failure to discipline
    Failure to supervise
    Failure to train
    False arrest
    Language/ethnic/minority needs
    Loss or damage to property
    Over/Unlawful Detention
    Pattern or Practice
    Placement in detention facilities
    Racial profiling
    Records Disclosure
    Search policies
    Transportation
    Immigration/Border
    Constitutional rights
    Detention - procedures
    Undocumented immigrants - state and local regulation
    Language
    Spanish
    National Origin/Ethnicity
    Hispanic
    Plaintiff Type
    Private Plaintiff
    U.S. Dept of Justice plaintiff
    Type of Facility
    Government-run
    Causes of Action 42 U.S.C. § 14141
    42 U.S.C. § 1983
    Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201
    State law
    Title VI, Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq.
    Defendant(s) County of Maricopa
    Maricopa County Sherriff's Office
    Plaintiff Description All Latino persons who, since January 2007, have been or will be in the future, stopped, detained, questioned or searched by MCSO agents while driving or sitting in a vehicle on a public roadway or parking area in Maricopa County, Arizona.
    Indexed Lawyer Organizations ACLU Chapters (any)
    ACLU National (all projects)
    MALDEF
    U.S. Dept. of Justice Civil Rights Division
    Class action status sought Yes
    Class action status granted Yes
    Prevailing Party Plaintiff
    Public Int. Lawyer Yes
    Nature of Relief Attorneys fees
    Damages
    Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
    Source of Relief Litigation
    Order Duration 2013 - n/a
    Case Ongoing Yes
    Case Listing PN-AZ-0001 : United States v. Maricopa County (D. Ariz.)
    Additional Resources
    click to show/hide detail
      Data examining the Department of Justice's civil rights investigations of local and state police departments
    Marshall Project
    Date: Jan. 17, 2017
    By: Tom Meagher (Marshall Project)
    [ Detail ] [ External Link ]

      The Civil Rights Division’s Pattern and Practice Police Reform Work: 1994-Present
    https://www.justice.gov/
    Date: Jan. 4, 2017
    By: U.S. Department of Justice
    [ Detail ] [ External Link ]

      An Interactive Guide to the Civil Rights Division’s Police Reforms
    https://www.justice.gov/
    Date: Jan. 4, 2017
    By: U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division (U.S. Department of Justice)
    [ Detail ] [ External Link ]

      What Happens When Police Are Forced to Reform?
    Date: Nov. 13, 2015
    By: Kimbriell Kelly, Sarah Childress and Steven Rich (Frontline/Post)
    Citation: Washington Post (Nov. 13, 2015)
    [ Detail ] [ External Link ]

      Federal Enforcement of Police Reform
    Date: 2014
    By: Stephen Rushin (University of Illinois College of Law, University of California, Berkeley - Jurisprudence and Social Policy Program Faculty)
    Citation: 82 Fordham Law Review 3189 (2014)
    [ Detail ] [ External Link ]

    Docket(s)
    2:07−cv−02513 (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000.pdf | Detail
    Date: 04/13/2017
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    General Documents
    First Amended Complaint [ECF# 18]
    PN-AZ-0003-0030.pdf | Detail
    Date: 07/16/2008
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Order [ECF# 25] (2008 WL 4174918) (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0001.pdf | WESTLAW | Detail
    Date: 09/05/2008
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Defendants' Rule 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint [ECF# 39]
    PN-AZ-0003-0036.pdf | Detail
    Date: 09/24/2008
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Order [ECF# 36] (2008 WL 4446696) (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0002.pdf | WESTLAW | Detail
    Date: 09/29/2008
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Response in Opposition to Defendants' Rule 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint [ECF# 48]
    PN-AZ-0003-0037.pdf | Detail
    Date: 10/14/2008
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Order [ECF# 60] (598 F.Supp.2d 1025) (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0003.pdf | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
    Date: 02/10/2009
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Order [ECF# 138] (2009 WL 2132693) (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0004.pdf | WESTLAW | Detail
    Date: 07/15/2009
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Order [ECF# 147] (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0035.pdf | Detail
    Date: 07/27/2009
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Order [ECF# 154] (2009 WL 2515618) (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0005.pdf | WESTLAW | Detail
    Date: 08/13/2009
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Order [ECF# 155] (2009 WL 2707241) (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0006.pdf | WESTLAW | Detail
    Date: 08/21/2009
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Order [ECF# 194] (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0007.pdf | Detail
    Date: 10/13/2009
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Order [ECF# 208] (2009 WL 3489402) (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0008.pdf | WESTLAW | Detail
    Date: 10/28/2009
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Order [ECF# 261] (2010 WL 582189) (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0009.pdf | WESTLAW | Detail
    Date: 02/11/2010
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Order [ECF# 278] (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0010.pdf | Detail
    Date: 03/01/2010
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Order [ECF# 278] (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0011.pdf | Detail
    Date: 03/01/2010
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Order [ECF# 289] (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0012.pdf | Detail
    Date: 03/22/2010
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Order [ECF# 311] (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0034.pdf | Detail
    Date: 06/04/2010
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Protective Order [ECF# 333] (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0033.pdf | Detail
    Date: 08/05/2010
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Order [ECF# 368] (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0032.pdf | Detail
    Date: 10/01/2010
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Order [ECF# 386] (2010 WL 4879148) (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0013.pdf | WESTLAW | Detail
    Date: 11/23/2010
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Order [ECF# 392] (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0031.pdf | Detail
    Date: 12/09/2010
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Order [ECF# 409] (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0014.pdf | Detail
    Date: 03/21/2011
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF# 413]
    PN-AZ-0003-0038.pdf | Detail
    Date: 04/29/2011
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Defendants' Statement of Fact in Support of their Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF# 413-1]
    PN-AZ-0003-0039.pdf | Detail
    Date: 04/29/2011
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Plaintiffs' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [ECF# 413]
    PN-AZ-0003-0040.pdf | Detail
    Date: 04/29/2011
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Order [ECF# 448] (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0016.pdf | Detail
    Date: 06/01/2011
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Defendants' Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [ECF# 452]
    PN-AZ-0003-0041.pdf | Detail
    Date: 06/03/2011
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Defendants' Response to Plaintiffs' Statement of Facts in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and Controverting Statement of Facts [ECF# 453]
    PN-AZ-0003-0042.pdf | Detail
    Date: 06/03/2011
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Plaintiffs' Opposition to Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF# 455]
    PN-AZ-0003-0043.pdf | Detail
    Date: 06/03/2011
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Plaintiffs' Responses and Objections to Defendants' Statements of Fact and Supplemental Facts in Opposition to Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF# 456]
    PN-AZ-0003-0044.pdf | Detail
    Date: 06/03/2011
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Order [ECF# 461] (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0015.pdf | Detail
    Date: 06/08/2011
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Judgment on Attorneys' Fees [ECF# 462] (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0018.pdf | Detail
    Date: 06/08/2011
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Defendants' Reply in Support of Their Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF# 465]
    PN-AZ-0003-0045.pdf | Detail
    Date: 06/16/2011
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    [Plaintiffs'] Reply Memorandum in Support of [Their] Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [ECF# 466]
    PN-AZ-0003-0046.pdf | Detail
    Date: 06/23/2011
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Plaintiffs' Responses to Defendants' Supplemental Statement of Facts and Reply to Defendants' Responses and Objections to Plaintiffs' Separate Statement of Facts in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [ECF# 467]
    PN-AZ-0003-0047.pdf | Detail
    Date: 06/23/2011
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Order [ECF# 482] (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0017.pdf | Detail
    Date: 12/09/2011
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Order [ECF# 493] (2011 WL 6740709) (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0020.pdf | WESTLAW | Detail
    Date: 12/23/2011
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Order [ECF# 494] (836 F.Supp.2d 959) (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0021.pdf | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
    Date: 12/23/2011
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Notice of Appeal (Interlocutory) [ECF# 500]
    PN-AZ-0003-0023.pdf | Detail
    Date: 01/13/2012
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    [Appeals court docketing notice] [Ct. of App. ECF# 503]
    PN-AZ-0003-0024.pdf | Detail
    Date: 01/17/2012
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Order Setting Trial [ECF# 529] (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0025.pdf | Detail
    Date: 03/23/2012
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Final Pretrial Order [ECF# 530] (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0026.pdf | Detail
    Date: 03/23/2012
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Order [ECF# 537] (2012 WL 2339528) (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0022.pdf | WESTLAW | Detail
    Date: 06/19/2012
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Order [ECF# 542] (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0048.pdf | Detail
    Date: 07/03/2012
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Order [ECF# 566] (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0027.pdf | Detail
    Date: 08/13/2012
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Order [ECF# 567] (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0029.pdf | Detail
    Date: 08/15/2012
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Opinion [Ct. of App. ECF# 578-1] (695 F.3d 990)
    PN-AZ-0003-0028.pdf | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
    Date: 09/13/2012
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law [ECF# 579] (989 F.Supp.2d 822) (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0049.pdf | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
    Date: 05/24/2013
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Statement of Interest by the United States [ECF# 580]
    PN-AZ-0003-0055.pdf | External Link | Detail
    Date: 06/13/2013
    Source: U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, Special Litigation Section
    Supplemental Permanent Injunction/Judgment Order [ECF# 606] (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0050.pdf | Detail
    Date: 10/02/2013
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Order Appointing Monitor [ECF# 649] (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0051.pdf | Detail
    Date: 01/17/2014
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Amendments to the Supplemental Permanent Injunction/Judgment Order [ECF# 670] (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0052.pdf | Detail
    Date: 04/04/2014
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Order Granting Motion for Attorney fees [ECF# 742] (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0053.pdf | Detail
    Date: 09/11/2014
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    First Quarterly Report [ECF# 744]
    PN-AZ-0003-0066.pdf | Detail
    Date: 09/18/2014
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Order Granting Stipulation to Amend Supplemental/permanent Injunction/Judgment Order [ECF# 748] (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0054.pdf | Detail
    Date: 10/10/2014
    Second Quarterly Report [ECF# 834]
    PN-AZ-0003-0067.pdf | Detail
    Date: 12/15/2014
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Order to Show Cause [ECF# 880] (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0057.pdf | Detail
    Date: 02/12/2015
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Opinion [Ct. of App. ECF# 69-1] (784 F.3d 1254)
    PN-AZ-0003-0065.pdf | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
    Date: 04/15/2015
    Source: ACLU
    Third Report [ECF# 1010]
    PN-AZ-0003-0068.pdf | Detail
    Date: 04/16/2015
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Fourth Report [ECF# 1170]
    PN-AZ-0003-0069.pdf | Detail
    Date: 07/14/2015
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Order [ECF# 1239] (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0058.pdf | Detail
    Date: 08/13/2015
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Order Amending Supplemental Permanent Injunction/Judgment Order [ECF# 1270] (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0059.pdf | Detail
    Date: 08/26/2015
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Complaint in Intervention [ECF# 1277]
    PN-AZ-0003-0060.pdf | Detail
    Date: 08/31/2015
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Fifth Report [ECF# 1474]
    PN-AZ-0003-0070.pdf | Detail
    Date: 10/16/2015
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Findings of Facts and Order Setting a Hearing [ECF# 1677] (2016 WL 2783715) (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0064.pdf | WESTLAW | Detail
    Date: 05/13/2016
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Eighth Report [ECF# 1759]
    PN-AZ-0003-0071.pdf | Detail
    Date: 07/21/2016
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Amended Second Supplemental Permanent Injunction/Judgement Order [ECF# 1760] (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0061.pdf | Detail
    Date: 07/22/2016
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Second Amended Second Supplemental Permanent Injunction/Judgement Order [ECF# 1765] (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0062.pdf | Detail
    Date: 07/26/2016
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Order Re Criminal Contempt [ECF# 1792] (D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0063.pdf | Detail
    Date: 08/19/2016
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Ninth Report [ECF# 1858]
    PN-AZ-0003-0072.pdf | Detail
    Date: 10/28/2016
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Tenth Report [ECF# 1943]
    PN-AZ-0003-0073.pdf | Detail
    Date: 02/10/2017
    Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
    Judges Berzon, Marsha Siegel (Ninth Circuit)
    PN-AZ-0003-0028 | PN-AZ-0003-0030 | PN-AZ-0003-0065
    Graber, Susan (Ninth Circuit)
    PN-AZ-0003-0028 | PN-AZ-0003-0065
    Murguia, Mary Helen (D. Ariz., Ninth Circuit)
    PN-AZ-0003-0001 | PN-AZ-0003-0002 | PN-AZ-0003-0003 | PN-AZ-0003-0004
    Snow, G. Murray (State Appellate Court, D. Ariz.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0005 | PN-AZ-0003-0006 | PN-AZ-0003-0007 | PN-AZ-0003-0008 | PN-AZ-0003-0009 | PN-AZ-0003-0010 | PN-AZ-0003-0011 | PN-AZ-0003-0012 | PN-AZ-0003-0013 | PN-AZ-0003-0014 | PN-AZ-0003-0015 | PN-AZ-0003-0016 | PN-AZ-0003-0017 | PN-AZ-0003-0020 | PN-AZ-0003-0021 | PN-AZ-0003-0022 | PN-AZ-0003-0025 | PN-AZ-0003-0026 | PN-AZ-0003-0027 | PN-AZ-0003-0029 | PN-AZ-0003-0031 | PN-AZ-0003-0032 | PN-AZ-0003-0033 | PN-AZ-0003-0034 | PN-AZ-0003-0035 | PN-AZ-0003-0048 | PN-AZ-0003-0049 | PN-AZ-0003-0050 | PN-AZ-0003-0051 | PN-AZ-0003-0052 | PN-AZ-0003-0053 | PN-AZ-0003-0054 | PN-AZ-0003-0057 | PN-AZ-0003-0058 | PN-AZ-0003-0059 | PN-AZ-0003-0061 | PN-AZ-0003-0062 | PN-AZ-0003-0063 | PN-AZ-0003-0064 | PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Wallace, John Clifford (Ninth Circuit, S.D. Cal.)
    PN-AZ-0003-0028 | PN-AZ-0003-0065
    Monitors/Masters Warshaw, Robert S. (New Hampshire)
    PN-AZ-0003-0066 | PN-AZ-0003-0067 | PN-AZ-0003-0068 | PN-AZ-0003-0069 | PN-AZ-0003-0070 | PN-AZ-0003-0071 | PN-AZ-0003-0072 | PN-AZ-0003-0073
    Plaintiff's Lawyers Albarran, Tammy (California)
    PN-AZ-0003-0040 | PN-AZ-0003-0043 | PN-AZ-0003-0046 | PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Bendor, Joshua David R. (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Bodney, David Jeremy (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-0037 | PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Brody, Kathleen E. (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Byrnes, Andrew Carl (California)
    PN-AZ-0003-0040 | PN-AZ-0003-0043 | PN-AZ-0003-0046 | PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Byun, Hyun Sik (California)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Campbell, Kristina Michelle (California)
    PN-AZ-0003-0030 | PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Caspar, Edward G. (District of Columbia)
    PN-AZ-0003-0055 | PN-AZ-0003-0060 | PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Castillo, Jorge Martin (California)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Chanin, James B. (California)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Cheema, Puneet (District of Columbia)
    PN-AZ-0003-0060 | PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Chien, Stephen C. (California)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Cincotta, Caroline (California)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Coe, Cynthia (District of Columbia)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Dodson, Priscilla G. (District of Columbia)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Flood, Kelly Joyce (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Furnish, Brenda Munoz (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Gallagher, Lesli Rawles (California)
    PN-AZ-0003-0040 | PN-AZ-0003-0043 | PN-AZ-0003-0046 | PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Goldfaden, Robin Lisa (California)
    PN-AZ-0003-0030 | PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Gomez Hernandez, Julia Alejandra (California)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Hartman-Tellez, Karen J. (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-0030 | PN-AZ-0003-0037 | PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Hernandez, Isaac Pasaret (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-0030 | PN-AZ-0003-0037 | PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Hickey, Kevin Joseph (California)
    PN-AZ-0003-0040 | PN-AZ-0003-0043 | PN-AZ-0003-0046 | PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Huddleston, Kathryn Lynn (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Hults, David (California)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Jacobs, Rebecca Ariel (California)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Johnston, Maureen (District of Columbia)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Kappelhoff, Mark (District of Columbia)
    PN-AZ-0003-0060
    Killebrew, Paul (District of Columbia)
    PN-AZ-0003-0055 | PN-AZ-0003-0060 | PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Kozinets, Peter Shawn (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-0030 | PN-AZ-0003-0037 | PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Lai, Anne (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-0040 | PN-AZ-0003-0043 | PN-AZ-0003-0046 | PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Limon, Gladys (California)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Lockwood, Aaron James (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Lyall, James Duff (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Moffa, Luis R. Jr. (New Jersey)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Mondino, Jennifer L. (District of Columbia)
    PN-AZ-0003-0055 | PN-AZ-0003-0060 | PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Morin, Michelle L. (California)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Mygatt, Timothy D (District of Columbia)
    PN-AZ-0003-0060 | PN-AZ-0003-9000
    O'Gara, Rosaleen Tobin (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Pace, Julie A. (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000 | PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Pedley, Lauren Elizabeth (California)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Pochoda, Daniel Joseph (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-0030 | PN-AZ-0003-0040 | PN-AZ-0003-0043 | PN-AZ-0003-0046 | PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Preston, Judith C. (District of Columbia)
    PN-AZ-0003-0060
    Ramirez, Nancy A. (California)
    PN-AZ-0003-0030 | PN-AZ-0003-0040 | PN-AZ-0003-0046 | PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Ramírez, Mónica M. (California)
    PN-AZ-0003-0030 | PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Sadasivan, Bhanu K. (California)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Segura, Andre Ivan (New York)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Steilen, Matthew James (California)
    PN-AZ-0003-0040 | PN-AZ-0003-0043 | PN-AZ-0003-0046 | PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Vidutis, Nida (California)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Wang, Cecillia D (California)
    PN-AZ-0003-0040 | PN-AZ-0003-0043 | PN-AZ-0003-0046 | PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Young, Stanley (California)
    PN-AZ-0003-0040 | PN-AZ-0003-0043 | PN-AZ-0003-0044 | PN-AZ-0003-0046 | PN-AZ-0003-0047 | PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Defendant's Lawyers Ackerman, Justin Michael (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Brandon, Maria R. (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-0038 | PN-AZ-0003-0042 | PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Casey, Timothy James (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-0023 | PN-AZ-0003-0036 | PN-AZ-0003-0038 | PN-AZ-0003-0039 | PN-AZ-0003-0041 | PN-AZ-0003-0042 | PN-AZ-0003-0045 | PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Cooper, Charles Justin (District of Columbia)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Dowell, Leigh Eric (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Elston, Diana Jean (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Fry, John Michael (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Garner, Deborah L. (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    GilBride, Eileen Dennis (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Hartsig, Charitie L. (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Hillbo, Alec R. (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Iafrate, Michele Marie (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Jirauch, Charles W. (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Kirk, Michael W. (District of Columbia)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Liddy, Thomas P (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-0038 | PN-AZ-0003-0042 | PN-AZ-0003-0045 | PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Martin, Kerry Scott (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Masterson, John T. (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Mathis, Casson N. (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-0036
    McDonald, Andrew Melvin Jr. (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Metcalf, Drew (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Mitchell, Barry D. (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Moberly, Michael D. (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Popolizio, Joseph John (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Reeves, Harold S. (District of Columbia)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Schwab, Douglas Arthur (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Selden, David A. (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Stack, Thomas George (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Stein, Lee David (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Uglietta, Ann Thompson (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Walker, Richard K (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Wilenchik, Dennis Ira (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Williams, James Lawrence (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Other Lawyers Aminfar, Amin (District of Columbia)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000 | PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Austin, Roy L. (District of Columbia)
    PN-AZ-0003-0055
    Gayle, Winsome (District of Columbia)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000 | PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Harwood, Ann Elizabeth (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Jung, Je Yon (District of Columbia)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000
    Perez, Sergio (District of Columbia)
    PN-AZ-0003-0055
    Smith, Jonathan Mark (District of Columbia)
    PN-AZ-0003-0055
    Strange, Elizabeth A. (Arizona)
    PN-AZ-0003-9000

    - click to show/hide ALL -

    new search
    page permalink

    - top of page -