XPost: alt.politics.liberalism, sac.politics, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh   
   XPost: misc.immigration.usa   
   From: daily.beaner@gazette.com   
      
   The Justice Department on Monday said in a court filing it   
   agrees a judge should erase her finding that the former Arizona   
   sheriff Joe Arpaio violated a court order and was guilty of   
   criminal contempt — a move that would have virtually no   
   practical impact but which Arpaio considers a symbol of   
   vindication.   
      
   In a short court filing, lawyers from the Justice Department’s   
   public integrity section wrote that because President Trump’s   
   pardon of Arpaio — which came before he was sentenced and a   
   final judgment issued in his case — guaranteed he would face no   
   consequences from the verdict against him, “the government   
   agrees that the Court should vacate all orders and dismiss the   
   case as moot.”   
      
   Arpaio himself had asked for such a result after Trump pardoned   
   him last month, but the judge in the case declined to do before   
   an Oct. 4 hearing on the matter.   
      
   [Joe Arpaio has been pardoned. But will a judge dismiss the   
   verdict against him?]   
      
   “My only reaction is that the law is clear on it, and the court   
   has an obligation to follow the law,” Jack Wilenchik, an   
   attorney for Arpaio, said Monday. “If not for the pardon, we   
   would have appealed this and obtained a jury and acquittal, but   
   at this point, the case is moot, and we have no ability to do   
   that.”   
      
   Arpaio, 85, was found guilty of criminal contempt in July for   
   ignoring a judge’s order to stop detaining people because he   
   merely suspected them of being undocumented immigrants. But   
   before he could be sentenced — and with Arpaio publicly vowing   
   to appeal — Trump granted him a pardon.   
      
   That pardon guaranteed Arpaio, a noted ally of Trump whose   
   extreme stance on immigration made him a household name, would   
   face no punishment for being found guilty. But his lawyer said   
   having a judge take the technical step of dismissing her finding   
   against him was a “matter of clearing his name.”   
      
   A pardon does not instantly undo a guilty finding, and in most   
   cases, the court record is left undisturbed. That is because the   
   vast majority of presidential pardons are issued long after   
   people are convicted and sentenced, and pardons generally serve   
   to forgive people, rather than to erase what they have done.   
   Some outside groups and lawyers have sought to intervene in   
   Arpaio’s case, arguing the pardon is unconstitutional and the   
   guilty finding should not be vacated.   
      
   But because Arpaio’s case was in the unusual status of not being   
   totally resolved, Arpaio’s lawyers argued, case law suggested it   
   should be dismissed — and previous orders undone — because of   
   the president’s action.   
      
   “Because the President issued a pardon before sentencing and   
   judgment — and clearly, before the conclusion of any appeals —   
   the Court is obligated to vacate its verdict and all other   
   orders in this matter, and to dismiss the case with prejudice,”   
   Arpaio’s attorneys wrote in a filing. “Because Defendant will   
   never have the benefit or opportunity to seek a reversal of the   
   court’s verdict through appeal (and a retrial by jury), it is   
   only fair that the Court vacate its verdict and all other   
   rulings in the case.”   
      
   As of Monday afternoon, U.S. District Judge Susan R Bolton, who   
   found Arpaio guilty, had yet to rule on Arpaio’s and the Justice   
   Department’s request.   
      
   https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-   
   nation/wp/2017/09/11/justice-dept-supports-arpaios-post-pardon-   
   bid-to-have-guilty-finding-thrown-out/?utm_term=.0c8d98fcee8e   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)