Is opinion turning against Joe Arpaio in Arizona?

The sheriff, a hero of conservative immigration activists, is facing possible charges for criminal contempt – and a close upcoming general election.

Ross D. Franklin/AP/File
Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, seen here at a 2013 press conference, may soon face federal contempt charges for ignoring a judge's orders regarding his treatment of Latinos.

A federal judge has asked the US Attorney’s Office to file criminal contempt charges against Joe Arpaio, the sheriff of Arizona’s Maricopa County, accusing Mr. Arpaio of ignoring court orders in connection with his office’s racial profiling of Latinos.

District Judge G. Murray Snow wrote that the sheriff had “a history of obfuscation and subversion of this court’s orders that is as old as this case,” according to CNN. The judge added that there existed probable cause to believe that Arpaio and a deputy had lied under oath to obstruct investigations into further wrongdoing. 

The sheriff's heavy-handed approach to undocumented immigrants at one point made him a hugely popular figure who sailed through re-election with two-thirds of the vote, but as demographics in his county have changed, his popularity has begun a precipitous slide.

The request for criminal contempt charges echoes an earlier ruling, also from Judge Snow, in which Snow found Arpaio’s office had defied a 2013 order in another case regarding racial discrimination against Latinos.

If Snow’s latest request to the US Attorney's Office is honored, Arpaio could face fines or jail time.

It comes as the sheriff’s approach toward immigration violations – which coupled harsh, often humiliating punishment with a kind of zany Americana – enjoys a national renaissance in the presidential campaign of Donald Trump, who has stumped with Arpaio on the campaign trail.

But Arpaio, who has served as sheriff for more than 20 years, has seen his popular support slowly erode since 2000, when he won reelection with 66 percent of the vote, according to the Arizona Capitol Times. In 2016, he may be facing his toughest challenge yet.

In a independent poll of 348 likely voters, Arpaio led his challenger by a 5-point margin – which is also the poll’s margin of error. Two weeks before, a Republican poll gave his opponent, Democrat Paul Penzone, a 3-point lead in the race.

Arpaio’s popularity among residents of Maricopa County has also slipped in more general terms. A May survey from Public Policy Polling (PPP) found that 50 percent of respondents viewed him unfavorably, compared to 44 percent who favored him. “Whether that actually translates into electoral vulnerability this fall remains to be seen,” the firm wrote, “but he clearly isn't exactly a beloved figure with his constituents.”

Part of the decline in popularity comes from the changing demographics of Maricopa County, which has taken in some 148,000 people from other states and 53,000 from other countries since 2010, according to the Arizona Republic

Retirees, who have long favored the county's dry climate, no doubt make up a major portion of the new residents. But Phoenix and its suburbs, where voters are often younger and more politically liberal, may look less fondly upon Arpaio.

In 2012, Michael O’Neil, chief executive of the public-opinion research firm O’Neil Associates, told the Capitol Times that Arpaio’s election victory that year could be his “last hurrah,” pointing to losses in some majority-Republican districts in and around Phoenix, where voters tend to be affluent and better educated.

“He was the most popular guy in the state, but he’s been on a long slow ride down,” O’Neil said then. “The question was, ‘Could he hang on this one last time?’ And he only won by a hair.”

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to

QR Code to Is opinion turning against Joe Arpaio in Arizona?
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today