Sheriffs Group Challenges Federal Law

[JTHunter]

A right-wing sheriffs group that challenges federal law is gaining acceptance around the country​

https://news.yahoo.com/wing-sheriffs-group-challenges-federal-162946214.html
(emphasis added)

GRAND RAPIDS, Mich. (AP) — Against the background hum of the convention center, Dar Leaf settled into a club chair to explain the sacred mission of America’s sheriffs, his bright blue eyes and warm smile belying the intensity of the cause.

“The sheriff is supposed to be protecting the public from evil,” the chief law enforcement officer for Barry County, Michigan, said during a break in the National Sheriffs’ Association 2023 conference in June. “When your government is evil or out of line, that’s what the sheriff is there for, protecting them from that.”

Leaf is on the advisory board of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, founded in 2011 by former Arizona sheriff Richard Mack. The group, known as CSPOA, teaches that elected sheriffs must “protect their citizens from the overreach of an out-of-control federal government” by refusing to enforce any law they deem unconstitutional or “unjust.”

“The safest way to actually achieve that is to have local law enforcement understand that they have no obligation to enforce such laws,” Mack said in an interview. “They’re not laws at all anyway. If they’re unjust laws, they are laws of tyranny.”

 

[mope540]

"right wing"

AP/Yahoo 'news'...no thanks. Think I'll look elsewhere for info without the obvious LEFT WING bias.

 

[dogtown tom]

The group, known as CSPOA, teaches that elected sheriffs must “protect their citizens from the overreach of an out-of-control federal government” by refusing to enforce any law they deem unconstitutional or “unjust.”

County sheriffs don't enforce federal law to begin with.
Political posturing by nitwits.

CSPOA and Richard Mack are full of baloney. They believe the county sheriff is the supreme law enforcement authority in the U.S.

 

[jmr40]

In most places the Sheriff is the leading LE officer in the county, but his funding comes from the local county government. They can have all their funding removed easily making them powerless. They also work for the Governor and can be removed and replaced if the Governor wishes.

The Sheriff has a lot of power, but only if the local government and Governor are all on the same page.

 

[dogtown tom]

They also work for the Governor and can be removed and replaced if the Governor wishes.

Maybe in GA, not in Texas.

 

[PWC]

In AZ he is elected in and by the county.

 

[herrwalther]

If local law enforcement take it upon themselves to refuse enforcing federal immigration laws, locals can refuse anti-gun laws. Saw it all the time with ICE retainers for illegals caught. ICE requests an illegal remain incarcerated, and sanctuary jurisdictions let them go.

 

[dogtown tom]

If local law enforcement take it upon themselves to refuse enforcing federal immigration laws, locals can refuse anti-gun laws. Saw it all the time with ICE retainers for illegals caught. ICE requests an illegal remain incarcerated, and sanctuary jurisdictions let them go.

Local law enforcement doesn't enforce immigration law, never has.
An ICE retainer isn't the same as local PD rounding up illegal aliens.

 

[Smokin Gator]

Local law enforcement doesn't enforce immigration law, never has.
An ICE retainer isn't the same as local PD rounding up illegal aliens.

Correct. But the left is just fine when local law enforcement doesn't cooperate with immigration, arrest shop lifters, rioters, looters the liberals smile and think how clever they are. But if a conservative Sheriff won't cooperate on firearms restrictions or will cooperate with immigrationn etc. , liberals throw a coniption fit and think it's not right then.

 

[dogtown tom]

Correct. But the left is just fine when local law enforcement doesn't cooperate with immigration, arrest shop lifters, rioters, looters the liberals smile and think how clever they are. But if a conservative Sheriff won't cooperate on firearms restrictions or will cooperate with immigrationn etc. , liberals throw a coniption fit and think it's not right then.

And?
Just because "the other side" does or does not do something doesn't change the law.
This is 100% political pandering to people that don't know what jurisdiction a county sheriff has.

 

[Smokin Gator]

And?
Just because "the other side" does or does not do something doesn't change the law.
This is 100% political pandering to people that don't know what jurisdiction a county sheriff has.

The last I've seen the conservative Sheriffs hasn't been charged or convicted of anything so we are good to go. If there are consequences it should be on both sides, if not game on.

 

[JTHunter]

Thanks for you opinions. This was what I wanted to see as to whether or not this was possible or feasible.

 

[Smokin Gator]

Now the left has been getting back to claiming Kyle Rittenhouse was not held accountable for shooting 3 people. Of course ignoring the fact that he was found innocent in a court of law because it was in the act of self defense. The one who lived and attempted to testify against Rittenhouse actually had to admit that Rittenhouse didn't fire until he pointed his gun at Rittenhouse. So he actually supported him.

 

[hso]

They also work for the Governor

Probably want to verify that. They're elected by the residents of the county and not appointed by the governor.

 

[GRIZ22]

Okay, if you believe in the Constitution Article VI says the laws made by Congress are the SUPREME laws of the land. Article VI.

These Constitutional Sheriffs by deciding what is or isn't Constitutional are exceeding their authority.

Most here are supporters of the 2A but they need to read the rest of the Constitution.

 

[Smokin Gator]

Until the Constitutional Sheriffs are legally removed from office or charged and convicted, no, they haven't exceeded their authority. Just as leftist local governments and law enforcement who refuse to cooperate and go un charged.

 

[Basura Blanca]

"right wing"

AP/Yahoo 'news'...no thanks. Think I'll look elsewhere for info without the obvious LEFT WING bias.

Seems fairly accurate after googling "Dar Leaf" and "CSPOA".
There's definitely worse descriptors the article could've used. This is a network of sheriffs who don't believe the 2020 election results, but *do* believe their position in LE allows them to have a broad role in interpreting the validity of laws and therefore can selectively interpret the constitution. I like having 2A allies, but in the broader context, there's a lot of red flags here.

 

[230RN]

And?
Just because "the other side" does or does not do something doesn't change the law.
This is 100% political pandering to people that don't know what jurisdiction a county sheriff has.

I'm not sure you understand the power of the public relations effect that Sheriff's movement has... elected or not, appointed or not, Federal Laws or not.

The Leftists certainly do understand how that power works and their PR onslaught for the past N years clearly proves that they do.

Technicalities and "truth" notwithstanding. And now I await the "we shouldn't stoop to their level" riposte. Gots nooz fer alla yez, pals. Maybe it's time we did.

Just think... the 10/22 is now an assault weapon in the minds of many.

Too many.

Terry, 230RN

 

[dogtown tom]

I'm not sure you understand the power of the public relations effect that Sheriff's movement has... elected or not, appointed or not, Federal Laws or not.

CSPOA and Richard Mack certainly pulled the wool over a number of Texas sheriffs........until they realized he was full of baloney.
Those sheriffs complained and TCOLE yanked his ability to provide training to Texas LE.

TCOLE released a summary of its findings and said its investigation found CSPOA training included claims such as, "… this is a war in which local, state, and federal agencies have been 'weaponized against you' through an 'incursion' of ‘state and federal bureaucrats’ that have been ‘infiltrated’ and ‘placed traitors and saboteurs in local authority.’"

TCOLE also found that the training included claims that sheriffs “have a duty to interpose on behalf of constituents' against 'state and federal bureaucrats' and other 'state agents' whose laws, orders or acts they individually deem as unconstitutional."

TCOLE found, "… there is no meaningful authority cited supporting these proposed legal theories." The agency notified the CSPOA in a letter (embedded below), "… similar content will not merit TCOLE training credit in the future."

His "movement" in Texas is virtually dead.

And now I await the "we shouldn't stoop to their level" riposte. Gots nooz fer alla yez, pals. Maybe it's time we did.

BS is BS whichever side spews it.