Maine
Court to decide whether to hear lobsterman’s challenge to GPS boat tracker requirement
PORTLAND, Maine (AP) — The Supreme Court will decide later this month whether to hear a lobster fisherman’s challenge to a government requirement that boats use electronic tracking devices. That case could have broad consequences for the American commercial fishing industry.
Maine lobsterman Frank Thompson filed a federal lawsuit against the head of his state’s marine resources department over a requirement that he install a GPS tracker on his boat to keep his fishing license.
In 2023, the state, where lobster fishing is a critical and historic industry, required all federally permitted lobstermen to do so to comply with a new U.S. rule aimed at data collection.
Thompson asserted that the monitoring constituted unreasonable search and seizure, but a federal appeals court denied his claim last year. He appealed to the Supreme Court, which is set to review the claim on Sept. 28.
“The petition asks whether Maine can force lobstermen to carry government GPS trackers on their private boats, even when they are off the job,” said Matt Gilliam, Thompson’s lead attorney. “We are hopeful that the court will grant review and address this important Fourth Amendment question.”
Many U.S. commercial fishermen are monitored at sea by human observers and electronic devices to collect data that regulators say is crucial to keeping the industry and fish populations sustainable and healthy. Fishing groups have used the courts over the years to try to curtail monitoring requirements with mixed results. Authorities have said the lobster boat monitoring program is important to improve understanding of the valuable crustacean’s population at a time when it appears to be declining in New England.
A spokesperson for the Maine Department of Marine Resources declined to comment on Monday. Carl Wilson, the department’s commissioner, said last year that the data from lobster boats is important to “mitigate economic harm to the industry” as well as to inform regulations.
Conservation groups have opposed efforts to scale back monitoring fishing boats at sea, which they see as important to protecting the broader ocean.
“Efforts to overturn a federal appeals court ruling don’t change the fact that New England’s lobster population has declined and fishery managers urgently need reliable and detailed data to respond to the complex issues facing our ocean,” said Erica Fuller, senior counsel with Conservation Law Foundation.
The U.S. lobster industry is based mostly in Maine, where fishermen caught more than 78 million pounds (35.4 million kilograms) of the crustaceans last year. That was on par with the industry’s typical annual catch in the 2000s but a sharp decline from a decade ago, when catches routinely topped 120 million pounds (54.4 million kilograms) a year.
Arizona
Judge rejects bid to release sheriff’s office from supervision in racial profiling
PHOENIX (AP) — A judge who ruled 13 years ago that Hispanics were racially profiled in then-Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s immigration crackdowns has rejected a bid to end the court’s supervision of the sheriff’s office.
Maricopa County failed to show that the objectives of the court’s orders — such as correcting the practices that led to the profiling — had been achieved, U.S. District Judge Murray Snow said in a ruling Thursday. He also found “a durable remedy” hadn’t been established to ensure the violations wouldn’t occur again if court supervision ended.
County officials, frustrated with the steep costs of court supervision, had argued Arpaio’s immigration policies are no longer in place, that racial bias no longer infects its operations and its past two studies of traffic stops show the sheriff’s office has changed. The U.S. Department of Justice, which in the past had frequently sided with plaintiffs, supported ending court supervision.
The case centered on 20 large-scale traffic patrols launched by Arpaio that targeted immigrants from January 2008 through October 2011. The patrols involved large numbers of sheriff’s deputies flooding an area of metro Phoenix — including some Latino neighborhoods — over several days to stop traffic violators and arrest other offenders. The plaintiffs were Latinos who had been stopped, detained, questioned or searched by Arpaio’s officers while in a vehicle in Maricopa County.
The judge’s ruling from 13 years ago required expensive court-ordered overhauls of the agency’s traffic patrol operations and, later, its internal affairs unit.
In his latest ruling, Snow called into question the studies cited by the county.
In analyzing the duration of stops, the sheriff’s office excluded the longest stops, such as those involving suspected drunk drivers, language barriers and other factors. The excluded encounters accounted for at least half of the agency’s stops in 2024 and 2025, the judge said.
Snow then cited analysis from a plaintiffs’ expert who evaluated all traffic stop data in 2023 and 2024.
The expert found a 4.7-minute difference in stop duration between Hispanic and white drivers. Snow wrote “these figures differ drastically from the relatively minute, statistically insignificant differences” found in the agency’s reports that excluded the longer stops.
Snow said the county offered limited evidence to explain the disparities.
While the county was seeking to end all supervision of the sheriff’s office, the judge directed lawyers on all sides to determine whether there might be certain requirements they would agree could be done away with from the court orders.
In a statement, two leaders on Maricopa County’s governing board expressed disappointment in the ruling and signaled the county would appeal.
“Continued federal oversight of MCSO would serve only to further deplete public funds and divert taxpayer dollars from the sheriff’s primary responsibility: fighting crime and protecting public safety,” said board chair Kate Brophy McGee and vice chair Debbie Lesko.
In a statement, Sheriff Jerry Sheridan’s office said it believed it “has implemented durable remedies for violations that occurred 19 years and three administrations ago.” The agency said it looks forward to working with the opposing side to see if portions of the order can be eliminated.
Arpaio, who was voted out of office in 2016, was found in both civil and criminal contempt for disobeying a 2011 order to stop his traffic patrols that targeted immigrants. He was spared a possible jail sentence when his misdemeanor conviction was pardoned by President Donald Trump in 2017.
U.S. Rep. Andy Biggs, the Republican challenger to Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs, has criticized the official who was hired by the court to monitor the sheriff’s office and has proposed legislation that would impose term limits and compensation caps on such monitors.
Court to decide whether to hear lobsterman’s challenge to GPS boat tracker requirement
PORTLAND, Maine (AP) — The Supreme Court will decide later this month whether to hear a lobster fisherman’s challenge to a government requirement that boats use electronic tracking devices. That case could have broad consequences for the American commercial fishing industry.
Maine lobsterman Frank Thompson filed a federal lawsuit against the head of his state’s marine resources department over a requirement that he install a GPS tracker on his boat to keep his fishing license.
In 2023, the state, where lobster fishing is a critical and historic industry, required all federally permitted lobstermen to do so to comply with a new U.S. rule aimed at data collection.
Thompson asserted that the monitoring constituted unreasonable search and seizure, but a federal appeals court denied his claim last year. He appealed to the Supreme Court, which is set to review the claim on Sept. 28.
“The petition asks whether Maine can force lobstermen to carry government GPS trackers on their private boats, even when they are off the job,” said Matt Gilliam, Thompson’s lead attorney. “We are hopeful that the court will grant review and address this important Fourth Amendment question.”
Many U.S. commercial fishermen are monitored at sea by human observers and electronic devices to collect data that regulators say is crucial to keeping the industry and fish populations sustainable and healthy. Fishing groups have used the courts over the years to try to curtail monitoring requirements with mixed results. Authorities have said the lobster boat monitoring program is important to improve understanding of the valuable crustacean’s population at a time when it appears to be declining in New England.
A spokesperson for the Maine Department of Marine Resources declined to comment on Monday. Carl Wilson, the department’s commissioner, said last year that the data from lobster boats is important to “mitigate economic harm to the industry” as well as to inform regulations.
Conservation groups have opposed efforts to scale back monitoring fishing boats at sea, which they see as important to protecting the broader ocean.
“Efforts to overturn a federal appeals court ruling don’t change the fact that New England’s lobster population has declined and fishery managers urgently need reliable and detailed data to respond to the complex issues facing our ocean,” said Erica Fuller, senior counsel with Conservation Law Foundation.
The U.S. lobster industry is based mostly in Maine, where fishermen caught more than 78 million pounds (35.4 million kilograms) of the crustaceans last year. That was on par with the industry’s typical annual catch in the 2000s but a sharp decline from a decade ago, when catches routinely topped 120 million pounds (54.4 million kilograms) a year.
Arizona
Judge rejects bid to release sheriff’s office from supervision in racial profiling
PHOENIX (AP) — A judge who ruled 13 years ago that Hispanics were racially profiled in then-Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s immigration crackdowns has rejected a bid to end the court’s supervision of the sheriff’s office.
Maricopa County failed to show that the objectives of the court’s orders — such as correcting the practices that led to the profiling — had been achieved, U.S. District Judge Murray Snow said in a ruling Thursday. He also found “a durable remedy” hadn’t been established to ensure the violations wouldn’t occur again if court supervision ended.
County officials, frustrated with the steep costs of court supervision, had argued Arpaio’s immigration policies are no longer in place, that racial bias no longer infects its operations and its past two studies of traffic stops show the sheriff’s office has changed. The U.S. Department of Justice, which in the past had frequently sided with plaintiffs, supported ending court supervision.
The case centered on 20 large-scale traffic patrols launched by Arpaio that targeted immigrants from January 2008 through October 2011. The patrols involved large numbers of sheriff’s deputies flooding an area of metro Phoenix — including some Latino neighborhoods — over several days to stop traffic violators and arrest other offenders. The plaintiffs were Latinos who had been stopped, detained, questioned or searched by Arpaio’s officers while in a vehicle in Maricopa County.
The judge’s ruling from 13 years ago required expensive court-ordered overhauls of the agency’s traffic patrol operations and, later, its internal affairs unit.
In his latest ruling, Snow called into question the studies cited by the county.
In analyzing the duration of stops, the sheriff’s office excluded the longest stops, such as those involving suspected drunk drivers, language barriers and other factors. The excluded encounters accounted for at least half of the agency’s stops in 2024 and 2025, the judge said.
Snow then cited analysis from a plaintiffs’ expert who evaluated all traffic stop data in 2023 and 2024.
The expert found a 4.7-minute difference in stop duration between Hispanic and white drivers. Snow wrote “these figures differ drastically from the relatively minute, statistically insignificant differences” found in the agency’s reports that excluded the longer stops.
Snow said the county offered limited evidence to explain the disparities.
While the county was seeking to end all supervision of the sheriff’s office, the judge directed lawyers on all sides to determine whether there might be certain requirements they would agree could be done away with from the court orders.
In a statement, two leaders on Maricopa County’s governing board expressed disappointment in the ruling and signaled the county would appeal.
“Continued federal oversight of MCSO would serve only to further deplete public funds and divert taxpayer dollars from the sheriff’s primary responsibility: fighting crime and protecting public safety,” said board chair Kate Brophy McGee and vice chair Debbie Lesko.
In a statement, Sheriff Jerry Sheridan’s office said it believed it “has implemented durable remedies for violations that occurred 19 years and three administrations ago.” The agency said it looks forward to working with the opposing side to see if portions of the order can be eliminated.
Arpaio, who was voted out of office in 2016, was found in both civil and criminal contempt for disobeying a 2011 order to stop his traffic patrols that targeted immigrants. He was spared a possible jail sentence when his misdemeanor conviction was pardoned by President Donald Trump in 2017.
U.S. Rep. Andy Biggs, the Republican challenger to Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs, has criticized the official who was hired by the court to monitor the sheriff’s office and has proposed legislation that would impose term limits and compensation caps on such monitors.
