Sheriffs Arresting Feds? 2nd Amendment ‘Sanctuary Movement’ to Protect Lawful Gun Ownership Grows...

As I stated earlier, Sheriffs are not part of the judicial system. They use the judicial system to execute their authority, but they do not report to the judicial system. An ‘actual attorney’ (who does work for the judicial system) will of course have a differing opinion.

The Supreme Court has upheld in Mack and Printz v. United States (1997), (Printz v. U.S. (521 U.S. 898), the power of the County Sheriff. The Court addressed the “supremacy clause” and enforced that the only thing ‘supreme’ is the Constitution itself. Where by the powers of the Sheriff reign supreme in protecting the Constitutional Rights of his constituents. The Court has affirmed that the Sheriff is the highest governmental authority in his County. Within that jurisdiction – inside his County – the Sheriff has more power than the Governor of his State. Indeed, the Sheriff has more power in his County than the President of the United States. In his County, he can overrule the President and kick his people out (and even arrest Federal Officers).

Additionally, the United States District Court for the District of Wyoming also ruled in favor of the Sheriff. The District Court cited in (Case No. 2:96-cv-099-J (2006)) , “Wyoming is a sovereign state and the duly elected Sheriff of a County is the highest law enforcement official within a County and has law enforcement powers exceeding that of any other state or federal official.” The district court confirms and asserts that “the duly elected Sheriff of a county is the highest law enforcement official within a County and has law enforcement powers EXCEEDING that of any other state OR federal official.”

Have you ever worked for a Sheriff? Ever spoken to a Sheriff on this issue? You should reach out to your local Sherriff and ask them for their interpretation of this issue. An article from an 'actual attorney' is an interesting read. Now try speaking to an 'actual Sheriff' and see if you don't find a different take on the issue.

Sheriffs are not above the law. If they break the law, they can be arrested. But they cannot be made to enforce a law they determine to violate the Constitution. And they can very much arrest any Federal Law Enforcement Officer who they perceive as violating those rights.

I can't be any clearer than I have been. You are free to believe what you will. You are also free to go speak with your local Sheriff. I promise you he will talk to you on this issue (he is both a Law Enforcement Official and a Politician so he will make time to see you). A good Sheriff also tries to work with all levels of Law Enforcement (local, state, and federal) for the greater good of his County. But every so often, when turf wars erupt over jurisdiction, the Courts have decided again and again in favor of the Sheriff. There are some Counties in Wyoming where Federal Law Enforcement Officials are not even allowed to enter the County unless they notify the Sheriff first (look it up).

Col Jim Harmon - Nowhere in Printz v US did the Supreme Court state that the supremacy clause gives the local sheriff 'constitutional' power, or any of the other powers you seem to think it does.

No court in Wyoming, or anywhere else, ruled on this matter, or said what you claim it said. Funny how that quote was first attributed to the Supreme Court, by you, and now it is a federal court in Wyoming. Whichever, it's still wrong. https://www.city-data.com/forum/current-events/2122244-federal-judge-rules-sheriffs-can-overrule.html

Attorneys do not work for the judiciary, or any other branch of the government. They work for their clients.

You are just wrong. Give it up.

GySgt Dawson Webb - While it is true that federal agents do not have the authority to enforce state laws, I would not expect them to. However, I do expect local authorities to enforce federal laws. Sheriffs cannot strip federal agents of authority they do not have. If state law says federal agents can enforce local and state laws, then a sheriff cannot stop them, as he is bound by state law. Similarly, if state law says the sheriff will enforce federal laws, he has no choice. In the specific case in Oregon, a county sheriff gave the Park Rangers authority to enforce local and state laws. Effectively deputizing them. Them, for whatever reason, he took the authority away. Totally his prerogative, as long as his action did not violate state laws. That does not mean that all sheriffs, everywhere, can thumb their noses at federal agents. He cannot.

The problem here is that there are those who think that because the sheriff is the chief law enforcement officer in his county, then he is beholding to no one, and nothing, except the Constitution. And that simply is not true. The authority of all sheriffs are derived from the laws of the states they reside in. The Constitution does not mention sheriffs, and no state, county, or local elected official derives any authority directly from the Constitution. There is no such thing as a "Constitutional Sheriff". The concept simply does not exist.

GySgt Dawson Webb - I am unaware of any federal law that violates a state constitution. However, the supremacy clause, most would argue, would take care of that. Be that as it may, the sheriff does not get to decide what does and does not violate any constitution. That is for the courts to decide.

While I expect local authorities to enforce federal laws, I understand that, in some places, they are not required to do so. So it would be up to the local authorities to decide what, if any, help they give to federal agents. No, I am not arguing against my own point. Never did I state that a sheriff, or any other local LEO, is *required* to enforce federal law, only that the sheriff does not have more authority than federal agents, and cannot cherry pick what he will and will not enforce.