NEW: U.S. Supreme Court Rebuffs Arpaio Effort To Remove Special Prosecutor, Attorney Faults 9th Circuit

The U.S. Supreme Court today declined to hear former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio's request to remove a special prosecutor in his ongoing battle. One of Arpaio's attorneys tells Arizona's Politics/Arizona's Law* that the 9 Justices "just (don't) have enough time to correct all of the Ninth Circuit's mistakes."

Arpaio is fighting to vacate his criminal conviction for contempt of court in the long-running Melendres case regarding racial profiling. After President Donald Trump pardoned Arpaio in 2017, the President's Justice Department declined to fight Arpaio's attempt to vacate the contempt conviction. The court has assigned an independent attorney to step in and argue that the pardon does not erase the conviction.

As Arpaio counsel Jack Wilenchik tells Arizona's Law/Arizona's Politics, the appeal - currently in the 9th Circuit - will continue despite the adverse decision from the Supreme Court.

"The Supreme Court just doesn’t have enough time to correct all of the Ninth Circuit’s mistakes. Appeal goes forward as normal except that the USA now has two sets of prosecutors who don’t agree with each other because the Ninth Circuit ordered that it be so."

The Ninth Circuit appeal was on hold until the U.S. Solicitor General informed the court in January that the government would not appeal the decision. The briefing schedule continued despite the former Sheriff's decision to ask the Supreme Court to get involved. Last week, both the Special Prosecutor and the Department of Justice filed their answering briefs with the Ninth Circuit, and Arpaio's Reply is due later in May.


*Arizona's Politics and Arizona's Law are sister publications. In situations such as this, there is overlap.

ARIZONA'S LEGAL SHORTS: Oral Argument Today On Case To Force Earlier Special Election For Senate Seat

(Initially reported on April 12.)

Attorneys will argue in U.S District Court this afternoon about whether the Arizona law permitting Governor Doug Ducey to control the late-Senator John McCain's seat until November 2020.

Arizona's Poltics previously reported on the constitutional challenge to the vacancy law. At that point, Sen. Jon Kyl was serving at the Governor's request. Kyl then resigned, permitting Ducey to appoint Martha McSally to the seat until a special election would be held in 2020 to fill the last two years.

The Arizona plaintiffs challenge the constitutionality of the Arizona vacancy law, and say the election must be held as quickly as possible.

The 45 minutes of oral argument will address both the plaintiffs' motion for an injunction ordering a speedier election and Ducey's motion to dismiss the case. The Governor's Office has hired two top Phoenix law firms to represent him - Brett Johnson/Andrew Sniegowski/Colin Ahler from Snell & Wilmer, and judicial nominee Michael Liburdi from Greenberg Traurig.

The Plaintiffs will be represented by Michael Kielsky from Udall Shumway and Chicago attorney Michael Persoon.

Judge Diane Humetewa is handling the case.

Welcome to the Home of "AZ Law"