Court monitor alleges Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office undermined racial profiling reforms

A court-appointed monitor has identified a “disturbing pattern” of violations at the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, alleging that senior leadership attempted to interfere with the department’s internal affairs unit to protect officers accused of misconduct. The inquiry, led by monitor Robert Warshaw, claims these actions undermined court-mandated reforms tied to the long-running Melendres v. Arpaio racial profiling lawsuit and resulted in a significant regression in compliance rates.

The investigation centres on the Professional Standards Bureau, which is responsible for investigating reports of misconduct. Warshaw alleges that Sheriff Jerry Sheridan and command staff pressured the bureau’s commander, Captain Gregory Lugo, to reopen closed investigations into two disciplined deputies who had been placed on the Brady list, a public database of officer misconduct. When Lugo resisted these directives, the report alleges he was placed on administrative leave, investigated by an outside agency, and temporarily transferred out of the bureau.

Warshaw concluded that the stated reason for Lugo’s transfer was a pretext and that the move was taken in retaliation for his refusal to meddle in investigations. An external investigation by the Arizona Department of Public Safety and a separate court-hired investigator both cleared Lugo of wrongdoing regarding a criminal complaint filed against him by a sergeant he had previously demoted. The monitor described the leadership’s actions as an attempt to create an internal culture where “favor and reprisal are tools of control.”

Compliance rates for internal oversight dropped from 95 per cent to 70 per cent, while rates for ending the backlog of pending investigations fell from 88 per cent to 68 per cent. The monitor’s inquiry also highlighted instances where command staff inquired about potentially weakening disciplinary policies to avoid firing a sergeant arrested for a drink-driving offence, arguing he should not have been dismissed because he self-reported the arrest.

Sheriff Sheridan and the department have denied the allegations, describing the investigation as speculative and arguing that internal checks are functioning correctly. In a 78-page response filed with the court, the sheriff’s office asserted that the incidents in question proved that internal checks strengthened by court orders were working properly. The department also stated that placing Lugo on leave and referring him for investigation was justified and required by court orders to avoid a conflict of interest.

The findings coincide with oral arguments before U.S. District Judge G. Murray Snow regarding a motion by Maricopa County to terminate court oversight of the department. Lawyers for the sheriff’s office argue that the law enforcement agency has fulfilled all settlement requirements and should be released from the settlement. The county’s Board of Supervisors recently approved an additional $36 million for compliance expenses, bringing total costs to $350 million, although a monitor audit found the department misattributed or inflated about 72 per cent of these expenses.

The American Civil Liberties Union, which represents Latino drivers in Maricopa County as part of the settlement, stated that the inquiry proves the department cannot be trusted to police itself without court oversight. The union called for the sheriff’s office leadership to be held accountable for the alleged violations of court orders, warning that a public law enforcement agency cannot operate with impunity if it is to have any legitimacy with the communities it serves.