The Goldwater Institute is asking a federal judge to allow Maricopa County taxpayers to see how public funds have been spent during more than a decade of federal oversight of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO).
In a friend-of-the-court brief filed on Tuesday, Goldwater urged the U.S. District Court to reconsider a 2014 order that keeps the federal monitor’s invoices confidential. Under that order, the court-appointed monitor, Warshaw & Associates, submits billing records exclusively to the judge, placing them outside public view.
Scrutiny of the court-appointed monitor has been growing in recent weeks. Over $300 million has been spent on oversight in the past 14 years, with approximately 10% going to the court monitor, Robert Warshaw, according to Maricopa County Board of Supervisors Chairman Thomas Galvin. The Board submitted a court filing in December asking the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona to end federal oversight of MCSO. Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell agreed in a post to X, writing, “There is no defense for this ‘federal monitor.”
Vice President for Legal Affairs at the Goldwater Institute, Timothy Sandefur, explained, “That means Maricopa County taxpayers have no way of knowing how their tax dollars are being spent on one of the most important services the county provides.”
“Although the Goldwater Institute has repeatedly requested copies of these invoices, the county does not have itemized statements, and the federal monitor refused to produce them,” he added. “But as we point out in the brief we filed on Tuesday, the government should not be allowed to keep such information secret unless there’s good reason, and even then, they’re required to specify what those reasons are. The court in this case has never done so—and even if it had, circumstances have changed in the decade since the lawsuit began.”
The filing comes as Maricopa County separately argues that continued federal oversight of MCSO under the Melendres v. Arpaio ruling is no longer justified. In a pending motion, the county contends that the sheriff’s office has implemented substantial reforms and that the monitorship should be terminated.
In its brief, Goldwater argues that the continued sealing of the monitor’s invoices prevents taxpayers from knowing how their money is being spent and undermines transparency principles embedded in Arizona and federal law.
“History did not end in 2014, and continued federal oversight of MCSO cannot be based on decade-old facts,” the brief states. “It’s crucial that Maricopa County taxpayers be permitted to know where their tax dollars are going — and that’s hindered by the existing orders and continued federal oversight without a full public accounting.”
The court has not yet ruled on either Maricopa County’s motion to end federal oversight or Goldwater’s request for public access to the monitor’s billing records.
Corporate media is making the case that the state’s largest sheriff’s office still needs federal oversight for racial profiling.
ABC 15 aired a segment criticizing a court filing requesting an end to the decade-long federal oversight of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO). The oversight emerged from the Melendres v. Arpaio case, a class action complaint against allegedly racially motivated detentions that occurred during illegal migrant sweeps.
FOIAzona caught reporting errors made within a report by ABC 15 that no longer appears to be published, including the claim that MCSO filed the court motion.
However, it was the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors (MCBOS) who submitted that court filing earlier this month. MCBOS has budgetary power over MCSO.
In their court filing, MCBOS made the case that MCSO had long ago achieved 100 percent compliance in remedying issues of racially motivated detentions. The county argued that further federal oversight would only divert critical funds for public safety.
In a video explaining the filing, MCBOS Chairman Thomas Galvin said the end to federal oversight was long overdue.
“After 14 years, four sheriffs, and hundreds of millions of spent tax dollars, it is essential to defend taxpayer money if federal oversight is no longer warranted,” said Galvin. “All that’s left to enforce are matters unrelated to discriminatory policing which should be left to the sheriff who was elected by you: the Maricopa County residents.”
The 14 years of oversight have cost the county over $300 million in compliance. Around ten percent of those payments went to the court monitor, Robert Warshaw.
Leading up to MCBOS filing were months of allegations that Warshaw has a financial incentive to continue federal oversight of MCSO. Warshaw has earned over $30 million in monitor fees since taking on oversight of MCSO in January 2014 — around $3 million annually.
Warshaw faces similar accusations of exploiting federal oversight orders for personal gain in connection to his 15-plus years of monitoring the Oakland Police Department in California. There he earns over $1 million annually.
Warshaw has also earned millions from federal monitor assignments in New York, Michigan, and Louisiana.
Warshaw formerly served as the deputy drug czar for the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy under former President Bill Clinton.
Almost a decade ago, Judicial Watch reported on allegations that Warshaw allegedly employed “harsh” tactics that distracted from the county’s law enforcement activities.
Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell said Warshaw’s presence is no longer warranted.
“There is no defense for this ‘federal monitor,’” said Mitchell. “One more reason I like to get my news from the non-fiction section.”
There is no defense for this "federal monitor". One more reason I like to get my news from the non-fiction section. https://t.co/XcDTqWM4nL
— Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell (@Rachel1Mitchell) December 29, 2025
Mitchell has been a vocal critic of Warshaw’s continued presence.
“It’s time we stop talking about Joe Arpaio — he is long gone and has been replaced by 3 different sheriffs from both political parties — and start talking about why the federal monitor, Robert Warshaw, is dragging this on and on,” said Mitchell in a May post. “Maricopa taxpayers should be outraged that we are at $350 million. Warshaw has no incentive to wrap this up.”
Back in October, Congressman Andy Biggs also asked Attorney General Pam Bondi to lift MCSO’s federal oversight. Supervisors Mark Stewart and Debbie Lesko, along with Mitchell, offered their support for the letter.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
The federal government has watched over the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO) for well over a decade.
The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors says it’s no longer warranted.
The board filed a motion with the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona to cease federal oversight of MCSO.
Chairman Thomas Galvin explained in a video announcing the court filing that the MCSO has not had an issue with racial profiling for years — the allegation at the heart of Melendres v. Arpaio which resulted in a federal court ruling against MCSO.
“After 14 years, four sheriffs, and hundreds of millions of spent tax dollars, it is essential to defend taxpayer money if federal oversight is no longer warranted,” said Galvin.
The county has spent over $300 million to comply with federal court orders; over $30 million in fees on a court-appointed monitor. That means every year, the county has spent around $25 million for federal oversight.
The Melendres case was a class action complaint alleging racially motivated detentions under former MCSO Sheriff Joe Arpaio. Under Arpaio, law enforcement would conduct sweeps targeting individuals suspected of being illegal immigrants, often in areas where day laborers abounded. The lead plaintiff in the class action complaint, Ortega Melendres, was detained despite having lawful presence. Other plaintiffs alleged they were stopped and questioned by law enforcement because they were Latino.
Galvin said the MCSO is “100 percent in compliance” with court-ordered policy changes, and has no evidence of ongoing civil rights violations.
The motion cited results from multiple periodic reviews, such as the Traffic Study Annual Reports from the last two years which found “no statistically significant differences between white drivers and [Hispanic drivers].”
The motion argued that MCSO hasn’t been able to devote full energy to public safety and “countless” other priorities due to the significant diversion of resources required to fund federal oversight.
“MCSO’s current practices do not violate federal law. But continued federal oversight diverts resources that could be used to serve the people of Maricopa County,” stated the motion. “It also upsets the democratic process and America’s federalist structure by making local officials accountable to a federal court — based on the conduct of a former Sheriff who has been out of office for eight years.”
Chairman Galvin characterized the county’s petition as a defense of federalism by restoring the power of accountability to voters.
“All that’s left to enforce are matters unrelated to discriminatory policing which should be left to the sheriff who was elected by you: the Maricopa County residents,” said Galvin. “In our federalist system, elected officials are accountable to voters.”
In a separate statement, Galvin said the MCSO was a “completely different agency” than when the Melendres ruling was handed down nearly 15 years ago.
“The voters held the responsible parties accountable and voted them out. Since then, MCSO disbanded immigration-related units, implemented new policies and anti-bias trainings, and is a law enforcement agency we can be proud of. Further federal oversight is unnecessary and only serves to divert taxpayer dollars away from true public safety needs,” said Galvin.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
Robert Warshaw, the court-appointed monitor over the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO), found himself challenged by Republican state and county-elected officials and over 100 attendees at a community forum with Sheriff Jerry Sheridan on Wednesday night.
GOP leaders, including Maricopa County Board of Supervisors Chairman Thomas Galvin, Supervisor Debbie Lesko, gubernatorial candidate Karrin Taylor Robson, and Maricopa County Republican Committee First Vice Chair Shelby Busch, joined the meeting with a large group of supporters of the Sheriff’s Office. The group demanded an accounting from Warshaw for the $311 million in taxpayer dollars spent over the past 11 years on the court-mandated monitoring in the racial profiling case Melendres v. Arpaio.
Supervisor Galvin shared a series of posts to X, laying out the case presented by Lesko and himself. He wrote, “Last night Supervisor @DebbieLesko gave eloquent speech at Maricopa County’s west valley meeting on federal oversight of MCSO[:] *$350 million in costs since 2007[,] *Compliance goalposts keep moving[,] *Monitor paid $2.9M last year[,] *4 sheriffs have served since lawsuit filed[.]”
“Maricopa County pays for these meetings, with taxpayer dollars, and thanks to all who showed up to participate in the public process. High turnout at any public meeting is always a good thing!”
Supervisor Mark Stewart shared video of Galvin’s remarks, initially posted by Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell, suggesting a concerted effort by the Board of Supervisors and County Attorney’s Office to pushback against the Melendres ruling.
Stewart wrote, “The time to end this decade long oversight. The men and women of the @mcsoaz Sheriffs office deserve recognition as a top tier law enforcement organization. The taxpayers expect their hard earned tax dollars to be invested in their safety. Thank you @Rachel1Mitchell for speaking out and to Chairman @ThomasGalvin for leading this effort.”
The time to end this decade long oversight.
The men and women of the @mcsoaz Sheriffs office deserve recognition as a top tier law enforcement organization.
— Mark Stewart Maricopa County Supervisor District 1 (@MarkStewart_AZ) July 17, 2025
During his remarks Galvin quipped, “Mr. Warshaw, you’re a tough man to find! In fact, this is the first time we’ve met.”
Mitchell described the scene in a post writing, “@ThomasGalvin speaking truth to the federal monitor—oversight of our elected sheriff has cost Maricopa taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars.”
Brandon Hiller, Chief of Staff to the Maricopa County Attorney, shared an image of Warshaw resting his head on his hand during the proceedings, which reportedly became raucous at times. He wrote, “The federal monitor was not pleased with all the support for @JerrySheridan24 and @mcsoaz. Time to end the court orders. 350 million dollars later… 30 million to the federal monitor alone…”
According to KJZZ, the overall cost to the Maricopa County taxpayers to meet the ruling’s 360 requirements for the agency, related to traffic stops and internal affairs, is projected to reach $350 million this year. Warshaw told the audience that the reforms ordered by Judge Snow are not complete yet.
“This agency has made a lot of progress. A lot of progress. We’ll get to the money in a second,” Warshaw told the forum. “Is this thing going to go on forever? No, no, no.”
The monitor told attendees that an independent firm recently did a traffic-stop study of the Sheriff’s Office and found that the bias alleged in Melandres has continued and that oversight will only end after the Sheriff’s Office complies. Warshaw said that the MCSO is still facing a major backlog of internal misconduct investigations, required to be resolved within 180 days with many exceeding that timeline. Warshaw’s most recent report indicated that the department is in “full and effective compliance” with 92% of the 360 requirements in Judge Snow’s order while the misconduct investigation backlog “remains one of the biggest hurdles affecting MCSO’s ability to reach overall completion.”
Lesko was unconvinced however, and said, “I ask the judge, the federal monitor, (and) all the stakeholders to please end this madness.”
Many critics cited the cost of the federal monitoring as their chief concern. Court records show that of the $311 million cost of the lawsuit to date, $31 million has covered the monitoring fees. Warshaw defended the cost, stating that he has 13 full-time staffers monitoring the department.
Galvin was incredulous, referring to the monitoring effort’s 2025 year to date cost of $2.9 million. “We have to spend $2.9 million—you have to spend $2.9 million on Mr. Warshaw. You have to pay for this meeting tonight,” Galvin said. “Debbie and I cut the check, but you, the taxpayers, are paying for this meeting.”
