*UPDATE 10-12**

Opponents of Joe Arpaio believed that their nemesis had been conquered, but they have just learned that he isn’t going to get what they think he deserves after all. The man in question ran for Sheriff six times and won every time, but his luck ended with his last bid for re-election. In November of 2016, Joe Arpaio finally lost.


The fact that Joe Arpaio lost was music to his opponents’ ears, but they thought that the best was yet to come. In July, Mr. Arpaio was convicted of criminal contempt, and his adversaries celebrated.


Joe Arpaio had come to be known nationally in recent years. When Donald Trump first questioned whether or not Barack Obama had been born in the United States, Joe Arpaio distinguished himself as a supporter of Trump’s. This may have been Joe Arpaio’s saving grace because President Trump has just granted him a pardon.


The pardon means that Joe Arpaio is not going to get jail time for his criminal contempt conviction, but his opponents do not believe that it is enough for Mr. Arpaio to lose his position as sheriff. They had their hopes set on jail time for the man they believe is responsible for a lot of pain in this community. Many people dreamed about the day that Joe Arpaio would be led into jail in handcuffs, but those dreams have been dashed. Fortunately, the Frontera Fund is still working to fight Joe Arpaio and what he tried to accomplish over the years.


“America’s Toughest Sheriff” gave himself that nickname because he takes a hard line against people who violate the nation’s immigration laws. Maricopa County is home to many people from Mexico and other Latin American countries. As sheriff, Joe Arpaio fought against the illegal immigration that he and his supporters blame for the difficulties people are experiencing in this county. Problems arose when Sheriff Arpaio was accused of violating people’s civil rights in the process of performing his duties.


The sheriff was able to conduct himself in what some consider to be a lawless manner for a long time, and they think that he began to feel as if he was above the law. That belief turned out to be untrue in December of 2011 when U.S. District Court Judge G. Murray Snow released a preliminary injunction against the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office and Joe Arpaio. The sheriff was ordered to stop focusing on drivers of Latin descent because it is a type of racial profiling, and he cited several examples of innocent individuals who were profiled or had their civil rights violated in the past.


Judge Snow made it very clear what was expected of the sheriff’s office, but the office continued to conduct itself in the manner it had before the injunction for more than one year and a half. In 2013, Judge Snow ruled that the sheriff’s office continued to racially profile the public. The sheriff’s office claimed that the violations occurred because they didn’t understand the terms of the order. Because the sheriff and his employees conducted themselves in exactly the same manner as they had before the ruling, the court believed that they just ignored it.


Federal district judge Susan Bolton convicted Joe Arpaio of criminal contempt even though he insisted during his trial that he misunderstood the order. She decidedly stated that Joe Arpaio had “willfully violated the order.” She also commented that Joe Arpaio did not ensure that his employees follow the ruling either. The truth is that Joe Arpaio told his employees to keep apprehending people of Latin descent. Nearly a year ago, Joe Arpaio lost his re-election bid, and now, he has been convicted of criminal contempt. Opponents thought that the end was near for Joe Arpaio and that he was going to get some well-deserved punishment.


The Phoenix New Times’ Predicament


It seems that anyone who opposed the sheriff department’s actions was a target for Joe Arpaio. For example, the Phoenix New Times regularly illuminated the sheriff department’s transgressions. Employees in the county attorney’s office retaliated by issuing a grand jury subpoena for the purpose of gathering information on the paper’s editors, readers and writers. The paper chose not to respond to the subpoena but did publish an expose on the matter.


In the next chapter of the story, Mr. Arpaio’s Selective Enforcement Unit paid a visit to Michael Lacey and Jim Larkin, publishers of the Phoenix New Times. The two men were forcibly taken to two different jails that Joe Arpaio managed, but there was such a strong cry of opposition that the officials were forced to release them in less than 24 hours.


The detention of Michael Lacey and Jim Larkin was illegal, and Joe Arpaio and his team denied them their First Amendment rights. After a long legal battle, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in 2012 that the sheriff did not have probable cause to arrest Larkin and Lacey. The court noted that officials who were voted into office by the public were responsible for having their critics arrested and that this is a terrifying action for anyone in that position to commit.


In 2013, Lacey and Larkin were awarded $3.7 million in their lawsuit against Maricopa County, and the pair founded The Frontera Fund in 2013 with the money. The Frontera Fund supports non-profit organizations that support the rights of people of Latin descent. The organization has given assistance to people who have faced discrimination by law enforcement and other officials. The hope is that the Frontera Fund will be a force that mitigates the damage that Joe Arpaio has done to the county.


About Michael Lacey and Jim Larkin


Michael and Jim continue to fight Joe Arpaio’s influence in Arizona. Although the ex-sheriff is not going to suffer any negative consequences, they are committed to funding causes that benefit the Latino community and will continue to fight for their civil rights. They believe that Joe Arpaio does not represent the people of Arizona and that this truth will come out in the end.


Human rights are models that enable all individuals to live with pride, flexibility, balance, equity, and peace. Each individual has these rights basically in light of the fact that they are people. They are ensured to everybody without refinement of any sort, for example, race, creed, gender, religion, ethnicity, political views, national or social birthplace, or even socio-status.


Human rights can be seen as a set of moral standards that everyone can benefit from. Human rights are not limited to a certain country or confinement. These rights are effective worldwide. Some countries create laws around human rights to make sure that that everyone is treated fairly.


Though human rights are considered to be international law, some countries are failing their citizens by not protecting such rights. For example, in some countries children are being exploited. They are hired to work in sweatshops that pay them very little but require that they work long hours. Children are not the only group of individuals that require some type of protection. Some countries make it hard for women. In these particular countries women are not respected nor protected by the law. Women can be killed and beaten by men and in return the men that have committed these crimes do not receive any type of consequences. The laws in these countries are biased because they do not protect women on the men. It is a tragedy for children and women to live in environments that do not allow them to live at a certain standard. In order to battle the unfair treatment of certain groups of people, there are a number of advocacy entities that are committed to ending these types of injustices.


An example of such an advocacy group is Children’s Defense Fund (CDF). The CDF is an advocacy group that is aimed to protecting the well-being of children around the world. This group works with other groups to help protect children from abuse and neglect while making sure that they are provided with equal chances of education. Another group is the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. This advocacy group guides and arranges international activity that helps to ensure the safety of refugees worldwide. This group’s main purpose is making sure that the rights and well-being of refugees are guarded. UNHCR hopes that one day all refugees have the ability to seek sanctuary in another country or state and eventually have the option to settle in a different state or to return to his or her native land.


The above groups have been around for years. Thanks to individuals with good hearts, these types of groups are being born every year. A newly developed fund called the Lacey & Larkin Frontera Fund was created to help financially support groups that fight for civil, human, and migrant right. The fund was started by Michael Lacey and Jim Larkin after the two received a $3.75 million settlement due to their rights being violated by a Maricopa County Sheriff.

Learn more: