A federal judge has denied Maricopa County’s request to end court-ordered oversight of the Sheriff’s Office, keeping the long-running monitoring system in place while opening the door to narrower supervision.
U.S. District Judge G. Murray Snow issued the 72-page order on Thursday, 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. According to KJZZ’s review of the ruling, the parties have 60 days to submit a joint notice outlining potential changes. That creates a near-term path for reducing parts of the oversight even though the broader request to terminate it was rejected.
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oversight in December 2025, arguing that the Sheriff’s Office had changed substantially and that some requirements were outdated.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. The Associated Press reported that county officials plan to appeal the new ruling.
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. The Sept. 10 ruling resolves the county’s current motion, but it does not close the case.
What happens next
The first milestone is the 60-day process for the parties to identify requirements that may be candidates for termination or modification. The court will then decide whether the evidence supports scaling back specific provisions.
A county appeal could proceed on a separate track. Until a higher court or Snow changes the order, the Sheriff’s Office remains subject to the existing federal monitoring framework.
For West Valley residents, the practical questions now are which oversight provisions could be narrowed, whether the county follows through with an appeal and how long the remaining compliance process will continue.
