Trump pardons controversial ex-sheriff
WASHINGTON • President Donald Trump on Friday pardoned former sheriff Joe Arpaio, the retired Arizona lawman who was convicted for intentionally disobeying a judge’s order in an immigration case. The White House said the ex-sheriff of Arizona’s Maricopa County was a “worthy candidate” for a presidential pardon.
The action came several days after Trump, at a rally in downtown Phoenix, strongly hinted that he intended to issue a pardon.
“So was Sheriff Joe convicted for doing his job?” Trump asked supporters. “I’ll make a prediction. I think he’s going to be just fine, OK.”
Arpaio, who became linked to Trump during the campaign for their hardline immigration views, was convicted of a misdemeanour for defying a judge’s order to stop his traffic patrols that targeted immigrants.
Both politicians questioned the authenticity of then-president Barack Obama’s birth certificate and have a similar history in sparring with judges.
In the statement Friday night, the White House said, “Throughout his time as sheriff, Arpaio continued his life’s work of protecting the public from the scourges of crime and illegal immigration. Sheriff Joe Arpaio is now 85 years old, and after more than fifty years of admirable service to our Nation, he is worthy candidate for a Presidential pardon.”
The U.S. Constitution gives presidents sweeping power to grant pardons to convicts, or to people who have not even been charged with a federal crime.
For most applicants, seeking a pardon is a long, arduous process that begins with the pardon attorney at Justice Department headquarters — an overloaded, understaffed office that currently does not have an appointed leader. The department recommends anyone seeking pardons wait at least five years after conviction, and be able to demonstrate their remorse and regret for what they’ve done.
Arpaio has done none of that, and it’s unlikely he will.
Robert Bauer, a former White House counsel during the Obama years, said that an Arpaio pardon would ignore criteria long used — that a presidential act of mercy should correct some past injustice or oversight, or serve a greater public good.
Granting a pardon now, Bauer said, “is a de facto interference in the administration of justice.”