Arpaio was convicted in July for contempt. A federal court said in 2016 that Arpaio’s policy as sheriff of using traffic stops and workplace raids to find suspected undocumented immigrants constituted racial profiling. He was convicted in July for ignoring the order to end traffic patrols targeting immigrants.
The pardon marked a devastating defeat for critics who believed the lawman sowed divisions by making hundreds of arrests in crackdowns that separated immigrant families and promoted a culture of cruelty by housing inmates in outdoor tents during triple-digit heat and forcing them to wear pink underwear.
They say it removed the last chance at holding Arpaio legally accountable for what they say is a long history of misconduct, including a 2013 civil verdict in which the sheriff’s officers were found to have racially profiled Latinos in his immigration patrols.
Arpaio was accused of prolonging the patrols for 17 months after a judge had ordered them stopped so that he could promote his immigration enforcement efforts in a bid to boost his ultimately successful 2012 re-election campaign. The decision to ignore the 2011 order is believed to have contributed to Arpaio’s 2016 loss to little-known retired Phoenix police Sgt. Paul Penzone.
Arpaio acknowledged extending the patrols, but insisted it wasn’t intentional, blaming one of his former attorneys for not properly explaining the importance of the court order and brushing off the conviction as a “petty crime.”
He accused then-President Barack Obama of trying to influence the 2016 sheriff’s race by announcing in court weeks before Election Day that it was willing to prosecute Arpaio.
But the charge itself wasn’t filed by prosecutors. It was recommended by the judge who presided over the profiling case and was filed by another judge, who later found Arpaio guilty of the charge. Lawyers in Trump’s Justice Department prosecuted the case at a five-day trial in late June and early July.
The TV interviews and news releases that media-savvy lawman used over the years to help promote his immigration crackdowns and win re-election came back to bite him when the judge who found him guilty cited comments the sheriff made about keeping up the patrols, even though he knew he wasn’t allowed.
The criminal case sprang from the profiling lawsuit that ultimately discredited Arpaio’s immigration patrols and is expected to cost taxpayers $92 million by next summer.
Arpaio’s office was accused in other instances of wrongdoing in the profiling case, though none led to criminal charges.
His office acknowledged throwing away or shredding some traffic-stop records during immigration patrols. The sheriff was accused ordering some immigration patrols not based on reports of crime but rather on letters from Arizonans who complained about people with dark skin congregating in an area or speaking Spanish. And Arpaio was accused of investigating the judge who presided over the profiling case — an allegation he vigorously denied.
The alliance between Trump and Arpaio centers heavily on immigration enforcement, such as getting local police officers to take part in immigration enforcement. They also have questioned the authenticity of Obama’s birth certificate and have a similar history in sparring with judges.
The pardon contradicts a key theme in the movement for tougher immigration enforcement — that all people, no matter who they are, aren’t above the law. Arizona politicians have invoked the “rule of law” for more than a decade as the guiding principle in pushing for tougher immigration laws.
During the presidential campaign, Arpaio showered Trump with support. Trump, meanwhile, has invoked Arpaio’s name in his calls for tougher immigration enforcement and used some of the same immigration rhetoric and advocated for tactics that made the former Arizona lawman a national name a decade earlier.
He appeared for Trump at rallies in Iowa, Nevada and Arizona, including a huge gathering in the affluent Phoenix suburb where the sheriff lives. Arpaio also gave a speech at the Republican National Convention in which he said Trump would prevent immigrants from sneaking into the country.
Trump issued the pardon seven months after taking office, though it is not unprecedented for a president to issue a pardon in their first year in office.
The most recent president to issue a pardon so early in his term was George H. W. Bush, who granted clemency after seven months as president, said Jeffrey Crouch, a professor of politics at American University who has written a book on presidential pardons.
“Given how long it took Bill Clinton (a year and ten months), and George W. Bush and Barack Obama (about two years each), waiting a while before using clemency has become the modern practice,” Crouch said.
Earlier in his career, Arpaio had skirted two federal investigations into his misspending of $100 million in jail funds and failed criminal investigations of political enemies. Neither investigation led to charges against the sheriff or his employees.
On Friday, San Francisco District Attorney George Gascón released the following statement:
Today the President pardoned a man who is best known for his repeated violations of the United States constitution. Arpaio used abhorrent tactics on the Latino community-whether documented or not-that I fought while Chief of Police in Mesa. The fact that the terror this man instilled on this entire population will not be met with consequences is simply shameful. By granting this pardon the President of these United States has emboldened white nationalists and made a mockery of the rule of law. Moments like these are a stern reminder that our shared values of tolerance and inclusion are the ultimate defense to hatred and xenophobia.
TM and © Copyright 2017 CBS Radio Inc. and its relevant subsidiaries. CBS RADIO and EYE Logo TM and Copyright 2017 CBS Broadcasting Inc. Used under license. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report