Maricopa County appeals MCSO oversight ruling

Maricopa County has appealed a federal ruling that kept court-ordered oversight of the Sheriff’s Office in place, moving the long-running dispute to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals while a separate process to narrow parts of the supervision continues.

Updated Oct. 14: The county filed its notice of appeal Tuesday, Oct. 13, according to the federal case docket and Axios Phoenix. Filing the appeal does not itself end or pause the existing monitoring orders.

U.S. District Judge G. Murray Snow issued the 72-page order on Sept. 10 in Melendres v. Sheridan. The ruling denied the county and sheriff’s motion without prejudice, meaning they may seek relief again.

The decision matters across the West Valley because the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office serves unincorporated communities and carries out countywide law-enforcement and detention responsibilities. The continued oversight affects agency training, traffic-stop practices, internal investigations and public spending.

What the judge decided

Snow found that the county and Sheriff’s Office had not shown that the court’s remedial objectives had been achieved or that the reforms would remain durable without oversight. The order leaves the existing injunctions and monitoring structure in effect.

The court also directed the parties to identify provisions that could be ended or modified. The parties have 60 days from the Sept. 10 order to submit a joint notice outlining potential changes. That creates a separate path for reducing parts of the oversight while the broader appeal proceeds.

The order’s appendices show why the next phase is more complicated than a simple end-or-continue choice. The monitor had found MCSO in full and effective compliance with 156 paragraphs of the court’s orders as of June 12. Snow nevertheless identified 156 paragraphs that may still warrant monitoring because they support core requirements, remain connected to active assessments or cover areas where compliance has not been sustained.

Maricopa County sought to end the oversight in December 2025, arguing that the Sheriff’s Office had changed substantially and that some requirements were outdated. The U.S. Justice Department supported ending the court supervision.

MCSO responds to ruling

In a statement issued Sept. 13, the Sheriff’s Office said it believed the agency had put durable remedies in place for violations dating back 19 years and spanning three administrations. MCSO also said it was encouraged by the court’s framework for eliminating portions of the order that are no longer necessary, according to Arizona’s Family.

The statement does not change the order’s current effect. Federal monitoring remains in place while the parties identify provisions that could be ended or modified, and the court decides whether the evidence supports those changes.

Why federal oversight began

The case began in 2007 and centered on immigration-enforcement traffic patrols conducted while Joe Arpaio was sheriff. The court later found that the agency had violated the constitutional rights of Latino motorists through racial profiling and unlawful detentions.

Subsequent court orders required changes in training, traffic-stop documentation, complaint handling and internal-affairs investigations. A court-appointed monitor has tracked compliance through successive administrations, including the current tenure of Sheriff Jerry Sheridan.

The county has argued that the supervision imposes substantial costs on taxpayers. Civil-rights groups have countered that measurable compliance and durable reforms are necessary before oversight should end.

What happens next

The appeal now proceeds in the 9th Circuit. A notice of appeal begins that process, but it does not establish when the appellate court will hear arguments or issue a decision.

At the same time, the district-court process continues. The parties are expected to identify requirements that may be candidates for termination, inactive status or continued monitoring. Snow may then hold a status conference or further hearings.

Until the 9th Circuit or the district court changes the orders, the Sheriff’s Office remains subject to the existing federal monitoring framework.