Grant Murray Snow started his legal career clerking for conservative Judge Stephen H. Anderson who had been appointed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit by President Ronald Reagan. After clerking for Judge Anderson, Snow entered private law until taking a judgeship on the Arizona Court of Appeals. In 2008, he was appointed to the United States District Court for the District of Arizona by President George W. Bush. Bush appointed Snow to the federal court because of his conservative views and his steadfastness to uphold the Constitution and the law.
Sometime between Snow’s appointment by President Bush and 2013, someone or something got to Judge Snow and turned him over to the dark side of liberalism and disregard for the Constitution and the law.
In 2013, Judge Snow presided over the trial of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio and his sheriff’s department on charges of racial profiling against Hispanics. A number of Hispanic organizations pushed for the lawsuit that was prosecuted by then Attorney General Eric Holder’s Justice Department.
I firmly believe that the only reason Holder pursued the lawsuit was because Arpaio was the only law enforcement officer in the entire country that had the fortitude to launch an investigation into Barack Obama’s reported birth certificate. Once his department found sufficient evidence to declare the official birth certificate to be a forgery as was Obama’s Social Security Number and Selective Service Card, Holder launched a number of attacks to discredit Arpaio and his department and eventually force Sheriff Joe out of office.
In the case before Judge Snow, Arpaio’s attorney’s argued that the vast majority of crime committed in Maricopa County involved Hispanics, specifically illegal aliens and drug traffickers. In order to effectively fight crime, they had to focus on illegal and drug trafficking Hispanics. It would be a complete dereliction of duty and waste of taxpayer money if they didn’t focus on those committing the crimes.
Instead of upholding effective law enforcement, Snow ruled against Arpaio and stripped the sheriff’s department of their federal immigration enforcement duties. He placed a monitor to watch over everything the sheriff’s department did to make sure they stopped their racial profiling of Hispanics.
Arpaio declared that the 4 million citizens of the county elected him to uphold the laws and expected him and his department to do their sworn duty. Consequently, the monitor tattled to the judge and Justice Department and contempt charges were filed against Arpaio and Chief Deputy Jerry Sheridan.
Arpaio’s attorney filed a motion to have Judge Snow recuse himself from the case for reason’s stemming from 2013 case and the current contempt charges. When the motion to have Snow recuse himself was filed, he placed a temporary injunction to stop the contempt trial. On Friday, Snow denied the motion for his recusal, stating that Arpaio and Sheridan did not meet the ‘substantial burden of overcoming the resumption that a district judge is free from bias’.
Since Arpaio and Sheridan have already admitted to the contempt charges because they were bound to do their official law enforcement duties, many believe the motion to recuse was nothing more than a delaying tactic.
But what I want to know is what made Judge Snow abandon his principles and oath to uphold the Constitution and the laws of the state of Arizona and the nation? How does he expect law enforcement officials to address the majority of crimes being committed in their jurisdiction if they cannot focus their attention on those committing the crimes?
It’s also a very sad and scary commentary when our federal government persecutes and prosecutes law enforcement officials for doing their sworn duty. Does the term tyrannical dictatorship sound familiar? It makes one wonder what incriminating evidence the Justice Department has on Snow or what the Obama administration has promised him for his persecution of one of the best cops in all of America?