News

Media Contact: Vince Rabago • (520) 955-9038 • Vince@VinceRabagoLaw.com
(Tucson, Ariz. – June 14th, 2013)

Today, Arizona attorney Vince Rabago filed a Complaint with the U.S. Department of Justice requesting that the agency investigate apparent efforts to unlawfully suppress and intimidate Latino voters in Arizona during the 2012 election.  Rabago included documentation and affidavits supporting the Complaint.

Rabago, a former state prosecutor, submitted two affidavits signed by voters under penalty of perjury who received misleading “robo calls”. These Spanish speaking calls told voters to bring their identification documents in Spanish with them to the polls in order to exercise their right to vote. Both voters receiving these calls are fluent in Spanish and immediately knew the statements were false and misleading. One voter, William Risner, is an election law attorney with extensive experience. The other voter, Dr. Ted Downing, is a former elected state legislator who participated in legislative election law reform efforts in Arizona.

Rabago also provided documentation about incidents in Maricopa and Yuma Counties. This included three signed affidavits from Latino voters in Yuma County, including a former candidate for Yuma Sheriff, Ricardo Sandoval, noting specific incidents of potential voter suppression. These include:

* Latino Democratic voters improperly issued Republican Party ballots.

* Problems at polling locations serving Latino voters resulting in hundreds of voters not being able to cast their vote.

* Election officials refusing to adequately investigate or take action on complaints ranging from improper local election practices to apparent violations of the Arizona and federal Hatch Act, laws which restrict government employees from political activity in the course of their jobs;

* Armed Sheriff employees allegedly asking for Latino voters to sign the petition of the non-Latino GOP candidate for sheriff.

With regard to Maricopa County, Rabago provided news articles documenting specific instances of two different official Maricopa County documents that were provided to the public with incorrect election date information written in Spanish, but the correct information provided in English.

Rabago said that any “discriminatory efforts to suppress and intimidate Latino voters, or any voters, are illegal, despicable and un-American. The Department of Justice must investigate the evidence and reports of apparent voter suppression in order to preserve the lynchpin of our democracy – the right to vote.”

Arizona has a long a documented history of minority voter discrimination and harassment, which resulted in Arizona being required to pre-clear changes in election laws or procedures with the Department of Justice under Section 5 of the federal Voting Rights Act to protect voting rights of Latinos and other minorities. The U.S. Supreme Court is set to decide whether the federal Voting Rights Act remains federal law, after hearing arguments in March on a constitutional challenge against the law.

www.VinceRabagoLaw.com • 500 N. Tucson Blvd. Ste. 100, Tucson AZ 85716

Yesterday, the federal district court in Arizona issued its long-awaited decision in the Sheriff Joe Arpaio racial profiling lawsuit, finding that Sheriff Arpaio and the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office violated the Constitution and illegally relied on racial profiling and illegal detentions to target Latinos. The federal court concluded that the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office use of racial profiling was pervasive and widespread. U.S. District Judge G. Murray Snow’s decision determined that the policies and practices of Arpaio and his office are discriminatory, and violate the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Arizona Constitution.

This Court ruling comes after last year’s trial in the case Ortega Melendres v. Arpaio which alleged a pattern of unlawful practices by Arpaio and the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO) during immigration sweeps and traffic stops. The plaintiffs did not seek money for the illegal conduct, but instead have asked for a court order a stop the illegal conduct.  The plaintiffs proved discriminatory intent in these practices, and the evidence was based on the sheriff’s own internal correspondence and public statements, and admissions that the MCSO uses Hispanic ethnicity as a reason to pursue immigration inquiries. There were also higher stop rates and longer stop times for Hispanics. Aside from from proving racial discrimination, the case also proved that the MCSO improperly detains motorists and passengers without having any adequate basis.  These Constitutional violations need to stop.

Arpaio’s unconstitutional and discriminatory abuse of power to seek political gain at the expense of both public safety and the community has come at a great cost to Latinos in Maricopa County, who’ve been forced to endure years of racial harassment and abuse. Arpaio and his office’s rampant racial profiling created a culture of fear in Maricopa County. Latinos and others who simply look or sound “foreign” worry that a trip to the store will end with an unwarranted police interrogation or illegal incarceration at the county jail. Simply put, singling out people out simply because they’re Latino – or any race – is illegal and un-American. It is high time for Sheriff Joe to resign. Arizona deserves better.

The Jodi Arias death penalty case hit a snag for the prosecution today, with the jurors deadlocking after being unable to come to a unanimous verdict. A mistrial was declared. “Under the circumstances, this was a blow to the prosecution, and a win for the defense,” said Vince Rabago, a former state prosecutor with experience in death penalty litigation in Arizona and California. “The State is likely to retry the penalty phase of the case, and a new jury will have to be impaneled,” he added. Rabago has taught capital punishment law as an adjunct professor of law at the University of Arizona Rogers College of Law, and has worked on capital case litigation at the highest levels of the state and federal court systems.

The Jodi Arias death penalty case hit a snag for the prosecution today, with the jurors deadlocking after being unable to come to a unanimous verdict. A mistrial was declared. “Under the circumstances, this was a blow to the prosecution, and a win for the defense,” said Vince Rabago, a former state prosecutor with experience in death penalty litigation in Arizona and California. “The State is likely to retry the penalty phase of the case, and a new jury will have to be impaneled,” he added. Rabago has taught capital punishment law as an adjunct professor of law at the University of Arizona Rogers College of Law, and has worked on capital case litigation at the highest levels of the state and federal court systems.

Tune in online to catch Vince Rabago live tonight March 7 2013 at about 6:40 PST (9:40 EST) on #huffpostlive to discuss Arizona law allowing jurors to ask questions of the defendant Jodi Arias in her capital murder trial. Here is the link to catch it live online: http://live.huffingtonpost.com/r/segment/codepink-thanks-rand-paul/51351da802a7607462000441