Tim Steller's column: Good to have a Democratic sheriff as new Trump era begins

People, myself included, have had a lot of criticisms of Sheriff Chris Nanos.

He’s run the department like a bully.

He suspended his opponent during the campaign.

A series of employees have been arrested under his watch.

They’re legitimate critiques, which I made in columns during the bitter campaign just waged between Nanos, a Democrat, and Republican Heather Lappin, a lieutenant in the department.

But there was a scenario I didn’t pay much attention to during the campaign that now gives me a little relief that Nanos won, despite everything — Donald Trump winning the presidency.

On Friday, after a recount, county officials declared Nanos the victor over Lappin by just 481 votes, or 0.098 percentage points. It was an incredibly narrow victory in a county where Democrats have an increasingly strong built-in advantage.

Not only did Democrats sweep the major county offices except for one supervisor seat, but Kamala Harris won the county by 15 percentage points, 57% to 42%, over Trump.

During the run-up to the election, as the weeks passed and the campaigns unfolded, I thought there was a good chance Harris would win the presidency. I wasn’t banking on Trump coming back.

Now that he is, there is a certain amount of safety in having a Democrat in the sheriff’s office, even Nanos with his baggage.

This is especially true in the area of immigration enforcement. One of Trump’s top campaign promises was to pursue “mass deportation” as soon as he enters office. This will necessarily require a lot of manpower, including local law enforcement, where they can muster it.

Asked by my colleague Emily Bregel about requests for local assistance in immigration enforcement, Nanos said, “I think they can handle their own issues just fine.”

“We will work with our federal partners and local law enforcement agencies as we always have. But no, I do not plan to do anything with deportation issues. I do not plan to put deputies on the border. I need deputies here on my streets.”

That’s an important stand as the incoming Trump administration plans its deportation efforts. The sheriff’s department is understaffed as it is, never mind sending deputies out on immigration raids or to patrol the border.

Other sheriffs, around the country and in Arizona, are eager to get involved. Cochise County Sheriff Mark Dannels, Pinal County Sheriff Mark Lamb, Lamb’s incoming successor, Ross Teeple, and Yuma County Sheriff Leon Wilmot all met with Trump’s appointed “border czar” Tom Homan, in Sierra Vista Thursday and talked about cooperation. (Homan was also accompanied by TV personality “Dr. Phil,” who has fashioned himself a border expert.)

Back to homepage

Subscriber Login

Keep reading with a digital access subscription.

Subscribe now

Democratic sheriffs Nanos and David Hathaway of Santa Cruz County did not attend.

Border a campaign issue

How to deal with border problems was a divisive issue in the campaign for Pima County sheriff.

Asked in a Sept. 3 debate moderated by Jim Nintzel what the sheriff’s department’s role should be in border issues, Nanos said simply, “It’s not our role. It’s a federal problem.”

“We do everything we can to assist Border Patrol when they need it,” he went on. “We don’t need to do Border Patrol’s job.”

Lappin aligned herself more closely on the issue with Dannels.

“To say that we don’t have a problem or it’s not our job is disingenuous,” Lappin said. “Our job is public safety. If we ignore the fentanyl coming through, if we ignore the human trafficking, we are failing and we are not doing our jobs.”

She said she would get involved with state and national sheriff’s associations that have spoken out frequently on border issues, and which Nanos has ignored.

Author Jessica Pishko spent a lot of time in Southern Arizona when she was doing research for her new book, “The Highest Law in the Land: How the Unchecked Power of Sheriffs Threatens Democracy.“ She told me Friday from North Carolina that while many Arizona sheriffs are eager to engage in immigration actions, it’s unclear exactly what they’ll be asked to do.

“In my view they’ve been intentionally vague about what the plan is and what they are doing,” she said. “They’ve seemed to combine interior enforcement and border enforcement.”

An ironic twist

There are other areas in which sympathetic sheriffs may be called on for assistance, she said. Suppressing left-wing protesters, especially pro-Palestinian ones, could become a priority in the Trump administration, she said.

Human rights activists on the border could also become targets, she noted, citing groups such as No More Deaths, Humane Borders and the Samaritans groups who respond to migrants crossing the border here in Southern Arizona.

It’s an ironic twist that some of the right-wing sheriffs Pishko writes about are now moving from anti-federal-government postures to eager cooperation, she noted. At the same time, some Democratic sheriffs are moving more toward a resistance position normally associated with right-wing constitutional sheriffs.

“Last time Trump was president, a lot of sheriffs were elected trying to defy Trump,” she said. “It’s an easy political move, because it gains (them) instant credibility with Democrats.”

With Nanos elected now, it’s comforting to me and probably a plurality of Pima County voters, that at least we won’t have a sheriff who is tempted to get involved in the Trump administration’s more politicized enforcement efforts.

If Nanos can address the department’s other problems, even better. In that case, he’ll win his next campaign by more than a sliver.