Trump pardons ex-Arizona sheriff Joe Arpaio: White House

Before Trump granted the pardon, the American Civil Liberties Union, which sought the court injunction against Arpaio, said it would be “a presidential endorsement of racism.”

Trump pardons former Sheriff Joe Arpaio

Washington (CNN)President Donald Trump has pardoned controversial former sheriff Joe Arpaio of his conviction for criminal contempt, the White House said Friday night.
Arpaio, who was a sheriff in Maricopa County, Arizona, was found guilty of criminal contempt last month for disregarding a court order in a racial profiling case. Arpaio’s sentencing had been scheduled for October 5.
“Not only did (Arpaio) abdicate responsibility, he announced to the world and to his subordinates that he was going to continue business as usual no matter who said otherwise,” wrote US District Judge Susan Bolton in the July 31 order.
Trump indicated he would pardon Arpaio at a rally in Phoenix, Arizona, on Tuesday: “I won’t do it tonight because I don’t want to cause any controversy.”
“I’ll make a prediction,” Trump said, adding, "I think he’s going to be just fine."
However, civil rights groups have pushed back against the possibility of Arpaio’s pardon.
After Trump’s comments at the Phoenix rally, the ACLU tweeted: “President Trump should not pardon Joe Arpaio. #PhoenixRally #noarpaiopardon,” accompanied with a graphic that reads, "No, President Trump. Arpaio was not ‘just doing his job.’ He was violating the Constitution and discriminating against Latinos."

Remember, pardoning a racist cop who ignored multiple court orders to stop being racist was more important today than declaring a state of emergency in Texas in advance of the largest hurricane to hit the United States since 2004.

Usual Friday night “news dump”, hoping that it will be forgotten by Monday. This panders to the 35% base, who likely weren’t happy with the creepy Gorka resigning. All far more important than a Category 4 hurricane, of course.

YESSSSSSSSSSS !!! :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

This is, well, unbelievable.

President Trump has basically just said that law enforcement is a law unto itself. Law enforcement officers are (assuming they’re “conservative,” although I think Barry Goldwater is probably rolling over in his grave) above the law. Law enforcement officers may violate court orders with impunity.

This is a slap in the face to the federal judiciary (something I suspect President Trump has wanted to do for a long time now). The judiciary is supposed to be, according to the Constitution conservatives and Trump profess to love so much, a branch of government *equal *to the executive.

I don’t think that it’s a big deal that Arpaio is avoiding a jail term. I don’t really care. Arpaio is 85 years old (or something like that) and is unlikely ever to hold public office again.

I do care, very much, about legitimizing his behavior while he was a county sheriff.

This is bad.

Not to mention the WaPo article about the Russian investigation,

This is why Donald J. Trump is president and is heading towards 8…

Would you mind explaining, because this makes no sense to me.

You might be right. Frightening.

Why are you happy? Don’t you believe in law and order?

SuperLuigi believes that Republican voters are more worried about racist cops possibly going to jail than the president preparing a timely response to a natural disaster that is likely to kill people and cause millions if not billions of dollars of damage. He’s probably right.

Well OK then. Not at all surprised.

A disgusting misuse of the pardon. But, sadly, not surprising.

It makes it hard for people to believe in our system. just sayin"

How so? The ability to pardon on rare occasions is a key part of our system.

A pardon doesn’t change that he lost his job and the practices he was following have been curtailed.

It is a key part of our system. I’m not questioning President Trump’s authority to pardon Arpaio.

But *who *gets pardoned, and why, tells you a lot about who is doing the pardoning.

But there are generally guidelines followed when pardoning to avoid the implications that a pardon like this sends. Arpaio’s situation didn’t satisfy those guidelines. I’d be extremely interested in what the Pardon Attorney thinks about this.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit